User talk:The ed17: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:12, 1 June 2009

the_ed17

· User Page · Talk page · Large cruisers · Library · Awards · Adoptee Classroom · Contributions ·

The wifi Ed was leaching off appears to have disappeared, this time for good. This means that his contributions will be severely lowered until college starts up again.

To start a new thread, click the "New section" tab on the top of this page.
If you started a conversation more than a week ago and it has now disappeared, feel free to go to into the archives and retrieve it.

	Fragmented conversations hurt my brain.
	I will respond here to comments that are posted here, and, well, elsewhere to comments posted elsewhere. Please, please don't fragment a conversation just to get my attention—if I comment at a page, it's a very safe assumption that I have watchlisted it. If you are concerned that I might miss a post elsewhere, use {{Talkback}} to notify me here.

Minas Geraeis

I've answered your remark on my discussion page and I've put it on the article's discussion. The actual reason for my contacting you however is this edit:

[[1]]

I would appreciate your not introducing english orthography in the german wikipedia. Thanks and best regards! de:Benutzer:Marinebanker —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.79.53 (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. That'll teach me to assume that things like that are the same across all languages. :) Cheers! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, in German, you capitalize all nouns (except for pronouns). Parsecboy (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, apart from the fact that in German pronouns are not coinsidered nouns. Well, for non german speakers it is probably not obvious that "Dreadnought" - in contrast to dreadnought" - is a german word. :-) This is analogue to not capitalising the english words hinterland, gedankenexperiment, kindergarten, gestalt, bremsstrahlung, realpolitik or gesundheit. ;-) Regards de:Benutzer:Marinebanker —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.70.174 (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about I just not make capitalization changes on the de wiki anymore? :))) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pronouns aren't nouns in English, either. >.> —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 04:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then why do they have "noun" in their name? ;) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 07:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blame the cabal. I had no part in it. Remember - I had no part in it. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 18:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you. ;) —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ED, apologies for dropping out for such a long gap during that FAC saga, in case you did'nt notice I returned with a couple of questions and some tweaks minutes before it ended. Ϣere SpielChequers 20:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It happens! And no, I hadn't noticed; I will address those prior to renominating the article (whenever I get around to it :). Thank you very much for all of your help! —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re (pro)noun: "What is a pronoun?" - "That is a noun that has lost its amateur status" (Calvin&Hobbes) de:Benutzer:Marinebanker --84.177.125.135 (talk) 19:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. I actually have the C&H book where that comic appears on my bookshelf. :) —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 23:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, does this work?

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Suzumebachisecret's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I need your help

User:Ww2censor has decided that File:ANTI1034.jpg is not sutable for the USS Triton (SSRN-586) article per [2]. I think he/she is missing the forest for the trees. See my talk page for details.Marcd30319 (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it can be used; the link above says that stamps can only fall under fair-use when you are using them "[f]or identification of the stamp or currency, not its subject." Apologies, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I did give "File:ANTI1034.jpg a home.Marcd30319 (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minas Morgul

Sorry to see the FAC has ended - I did do some work on the background, but never edit much at the weekend (and was reluctant to dive in with at least two other copyeditors at work!). Still, if you head back to FAC and want another pair of eyes over the article first, let me know. EyeSerene^talk 10:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, apologies for that; it was my understanding that you were going to be the only one, then Steve dove in and WSC went over it. It's no problem, and I totally understand; it will be going back to FAC eventually, so I will ping you again. ;) As anyways, many many thanks, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I've found on other articles that more than two writers or one copyeditor working on the prose takes a fair bit of organising so as not to be a recipe for endless edit-conflicts, but the synergistic nature of the way this place works means that sometimes lots of help shows up all at once. It's a strength that, occasionally, can also be a weakness... but I was quite happy to back off and the article has benefited from such close and expert attention, so it's all good. I'll look forward to revisiting it at some point ;) EyeSerene^talk 19:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AOT assessment

Ed -- Thanks for looking at the AOT article and reranking it. Frankly, I find your assessment rather begrudging and am demotivated, rather than motivated to continue improvments. But, its a lot better than when I started work a week or so ago. Anyway, thanks again. Hartfelt (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hartfelt. B-class is actually the highest one can individually assess an article, all higher levels have to go through a formal review process. You can nominate it for "Good Article" status if you like, where another editor will review it against the good article criteria. Alternatively, you can request it be peer reviewed by members of WP:MILHIST, or you can request it be reviewed for A-class, also by the members of MILHIST. I hope that helps. Parsecboy (talk) 13:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I did not mean it to be demotivating; I apologize for that. If you bring it to peer review or A-class, please notify me and I will review it and help you work out some of the trickier points of MOS. Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, Thanks for the note, and the offer. Hartfelt (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hey Ed, you don't happen to focus on the the land campaigns of World War I at all do you? I need some help at Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which is currently a real mess, and I figured you might have some expertise. It seems a shame that the bloodiest and (by some counts) largest battle in American history should be covered as poorly and inaccurately as it currently is. Got the time to help, or any good resources? Thanks Jrt989 (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. :/ If I was up at school and had access to a decent library, I'd try, but here at home I've got nothing really. I'd suggest leaving a message on WT:MILHIST, asking for a collaboration. Having said all that, please ping me if you put in up for peer review or A-class and I'll review it. Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shameless thankspam

FlyingToaster Barnstar

Hello The ed17! Thank you so much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. Flying Toaster

Wikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

From the editor: Writers needed
Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Superfire

Hi Ed. It was pointed out at the Moltke class FAC that this article now exists (it was created on 13 May). It's in pretty poor shape; I'm thinking at some point we should overhaul it. It doesn't need to be a priority or anything, but maybe something for a rainy day :) Parsecboy (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha I was going to create it, but apparently I won't be anymore. :))) Would you like to work with me on it now and get a DYK for you me and the creator? —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 02:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I'll be going to bed shortly, but I'll be around tomorrow afternoon. Parsecboy (talk) 03:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I'll be around tomorrow sometime (have to close at work :/), but we'll be able to throw something together. :) But, the first thing on my list is copyediting/possibly FAC reviewing Error: {{sclass}} invalid format code: 6. Should be 0–5, or blank (help). —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Army of the Tennessee

Ed: I've done a lot more work on the AOT article, added footnotes, etc. I've pretty much come to where I want to get. Picking up on your offer, I would appreciate some coaching on the MOS issues you see, as looking over the MOS link you provided was not very illuminating for me. If I do say so myself, I think the article is pretty good now and is presented with a consistent style, graphics, lot of references, lot of footnote, lots of Wikilinks, etc. (The only problem is, no one will ever read it if you believe the page view results.) Anyway, thanks for any insight you can give. Hartfelt (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll head over there now; you got me right as I logged on! :) I knew that the link I gave would not be helpful...WP:MOS is a bloody jungle, and the only way to mostly understand it is to study it for months or write a couple FAs (IMO, at least). Re page view stats: at least in my experience, they tend to go up when you get through FAC; I'm not sure if that is due to Portal:Featured content or people browsing WP:FA or whatnot. That's happened in at least two articles of mine (I haven't checked the others). —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ed: I appreciate your help and positive reaction. I can't really tell the signficance of some of the format changes you made, but a problem has now popped up. The article looks OK on the computer screen (Internet Explorer for me). Previously, the article also printed smoothly (all text). Now, however, the upper part of page 2 is invisible. This is true both in "print preview" on Internet Explorer and when printing the article phyically. (In case you don't see the same thing, what is invisible to me is all text below the contents box and above the bottom border of the Grant photo (photo itself shows up). I hope you know what to do to fix this, as I certainly don't (other than possibly reverting your edits one by one until the problem goes away). Thanks again for you interest. Hartfelt (talk) 20:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on a sec, will take a look with IE (get Firefox, dude! :). —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks just fine to me on FF and IE; not sure what is going on. I removed the {{PDF}} I had added because I added it wrong, but I don't see anything else that could have caused invisible text? —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, Something occurred to me & I looked into it -- It looks like you intentionally or unintentionally shrunk the 1st image (Grant). I restored that to 275px and that cleared up the problem. I don't know whether that was before or after you looked at it. Anyway, it's good for me now. Thanks again for your help and interest. Hartfelt (talk) 21:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was intentional, but looking into it I shouldn't have shrunk it; it's rather hard to see what that picture is supposed to be of when it's smaller... —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Special Event idea - Independence Day

You are exactly the kind of educationally and intellectually limited person that Wikipedia unfortunately suffers on occasion. However it is good of you to voluntarily excommunicate yourself from the topic; your comments are totally useless. Go and troll somewhere else. B. Fairbairn Talk 23:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive opinion of me! I would point you at Design 1047 battlecruiser, Error: {{sclass}} invalid format code: 6. Should be 0–5, or blank (help), Error: {{sclass}} invalid format code: 6. Should be 0–5, or blank (help), Brazilian battleship Minas Geraes, Brazilian battleship São Paulo, and ARA Rivadavia to demonstrate that I am not all "pro-American" and whatever else you dislike, but I'd prefer it if you didn't comment on my talk page again; any conversation I can have with you isn't productive. Thanks, cheers and bye, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your queries

Ed: Have tried to answer the AOT queries you posted. Also, I wanted to ask for MilHist peer review, per you suggestion, but cldn't figure out how to do so, since the page doesn't seem to have the template contemplated by the instructions. (I've queried Parsecboy about that, too.) Thanks again for your interest. Hartfelt (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have to run, but I will help you later if Parsec hasn't gotten to it. Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

United States Battleship Division Nine (World War I)

Hey Ed, thanks for the edits/comments on the page! I appreciate getting some feedback from other editors (something I haven't had much of while editing it these last few weeks). Any chance you would be willing to take it to the next level and conduct the GA review for me? I've spent a fair amount of time on this page and would love to get a quick turn around if you're available!

P.S. Quick question: Are the hidden comments intended to be problems you think I need to address, or are they just comments? I ask merely because I haven't encountered them before.

Thanks! Jrt989 (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I have time I will! Re P.S.: both ;) —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, now that I have a little time for a proper reply: it was no problem! I'll be attempting to get to the GA review soon; it's late here and I have to work tomorrow, so I can't spend a lot of time on here tonight. Feel free to remove my hidden comments as you think you have addressed them, ok? Heck, if you disagree with one, feel free to remove it. ;) They were just for your benefit! Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 04:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thanks for the advice and for attempting the GA review! Jrt989 (talk) 05:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 05:10, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter XVII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 20:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.[reply]

Ummm, no, nor does it need any

In this edit's checkin note you stated "um, if they're generic, it should be easy to find (a) source(s)..... right?" The answer is "no". Generic material of trivial importance to the topic with trivial demonstrability do not need references. For instance, you do not need a reference for "some cameras need photographic film" or "the sun rises in the east". But I'll leave the tag on, because I'm sure the next editor will come along and re-insert it anyway. It appears that everyone has stopped writing actual articles, and editing has degenerated into tagging and AfD fests. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? "The sun rises in the east" is rather obvious to anyone with a compass, but what is in that article is not very obvious to anyone who doesn't have a degree in that field. Re stopped writing: I am normally a writer...look at my user page? Anyway, cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 15:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, really, "any material challenged or likely to be challenged". Is there something particularly controversial in those statements that you believe requires V? Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK reply was a "challenge" to the material. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 16:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think I see what happened. The DYK challenge was put on an earlier version of the article that had only two refs. I added six more. So I assume from this it has failed DYK? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There were still questions on the newer version, so it was removed on the 24th in this edit. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 00:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thwack!

Plip!

Per suggestion. Shubinator (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did I not say that I should hit myself? Blarg. I hate beans... :-) Thanks dude!~ —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 15:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to oblige :) Shubinator (talk) 15:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC) (P.S. Fish + beans = a weird meal. Suggest adding some rice.)[reply]

*Sigh* and yes, that is a weird meal. However, who wants rice if you could have chocolate? ;D —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 16:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voorhis

Plainly Voorhis broke his "self imposed silence" now and then. Like in 1958 and 1962. Bullock tries to justify him saying that as head of the Cooperative League, he had to maintain his silence. But it is fascinating to watch anger and resentment eat away at this almost saintlike guy over time, til he writes that bitter book in 1972. I do have the paperback, it is almost unreadable, though part of it is because we don't care about detailed analyses of random Nixon policies today.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, apparently. Even if I agree with that it is "almost unreadable", I still feel kinda sorry for him... Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 23:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So do I, really. Rarely do people's lives have such clearly defined turning points as the South Pasadena debate. I wonder how many times he went back and said "I should have"? Plainly, it embittered his life.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even want to think about that. So many things could have been different for him had that debate gone the other way. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup newsletter XVII.V

This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.

Pool A

Shoemaker's Holiday (647)

Pool B

ThinkBlue (247)

Pool C

Theleftorium (455)

Pool D

Candlewicke (539)

Pool E

Durova (479)

Pool F

Sasata (961)

Current Wildcards

Useight (393)
Scorpion0422 (372)
Rlevse (329)
Wrestlinglover (307)
Paxse (285)
Ottava Rima (248)
Mitchazenia (226)
Juliancolton (181)
the_ed17 (179)
J Milburn (168)
Bedford (156)
Gary King (147)
97198 (142)
Ceranthor (111)
Tinucherian (106)
Matthewedwards (98)

GARDEN , iMatthew : Chat , and The Helpful One The Helpful Bot 00:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this hilarious email I got earlier today...

...from some nutjob who apparently thinks he can hack a steward account:

Tonight, you’re all gonna be a part of a social experiment. Through the magic of hacking skills and steward powers, I’m ready right now to blow your minds sky high. Anyone attempts to block me or revert, you all get desysopped.

Each of you has a button to block another editor. At midnight, I desysop and block you all. If, however, one of you indefinitely blocks as many constructive editors as you can, I’ll let that admin keep their admin powers. So, who’s it gonna be? Wikipedia’s most-wanted scumbag collection or the sweet and innocent contributors? You choose. Oh, and you might wanna decide quickly because the other administrators may not be quite so noble. — The Joker

What a raving lunatic :D Apparently he has a taste for theatrics...Parsecboy (talk) 17:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm. That is certainly one of the odder things I have seen as of late. :-) I hope no one fell for it... —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, apparently he sent them from various accounts to more or less every admin on Wiki (there's 1,600 or so...someone has no life). It was discussed on AN and AN/I, and apparently the checkusers are hammering the accounts as they pop up.

Oh, and get to work :P Parsecboy (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WOW. Who would waste their time emailing that crap to 1600 people? Pleh...

Already done as I got your message :P —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and apparently some non-admins got it too. It was probably script assisted, but still, that's a long time.

Hey, my reminder was at 21:08, you didn't reassess it until 21:09. What were you waiting for, Christmas? :P Parsecboy (talk) 21:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I got the same email on my wiki-email. Bizarre, to say the least. Cam ^(Chat) 06:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But why would you even take the time to write the bloody script? People these days... :/
Maybe. Or maybe I was using preview to ensure that it was right. :P —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:18, 28 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]

I know, right? Like I said, some people have no life.

Sounds like an excuse to me...if you were half the wiki-editor your record of FAs and other work implies that you are, you wouldn't need preview :P Parsecboy (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and re: the O class; I'm in the process of adding the technical details from Groner's, but if you've got stuff from Garzke&Dulin, feel free to work it in too. If there are any discrepancies (which there probably will be, considering the official documents had 6 years of war to be disrupted/lost/etc. in), we can probably just work them both in, like we did for the build time estimates. Parsecboy (talk) 22:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we're past the 5x expansion for DYK now, so whenever you want to nominate it. I'd do it, but I'm usually pretty terrible at writing hooks :D Parsecboy (talk) 23:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, even the greatest need help at times. :P

Sounds good.

I'll nominate it when it is mostly done—I don't want to nom a half-finished article :) —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Ed, can you do me a huge favor? As you know, SMS Von der Tann is going up on the main page tonight. The problem for me is, my sister is getting married today, and I don't know how long the reception and all that will last. So if you're on, would you mind watchlisting it for me? Thanks a ton. Parsecboy (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is unrelated, but check this out: a picture of Togsa after her launching. I wonder if we can figure out the copyright status of it and put it in the article? Parsecboy (talk) 14:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlisted, although I don't know how much I'll be on during that time... Leave a message at WT:MHCOORD too :)
Well, there's commons:Template:PD-Japan-oldphoto, but we'd have to prove that it was published prior to 1956... —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Your talk page archives

This definitely doesn't look right, and I thought you would be interested. I also left a message for Werdna to alert him. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on Werdna's talk page and am removing the automatic archiving for now. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 20:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this link on Werdna's talk page and I think I've found your solution...

{{Werdnabot|type=size|age=10|target=User_talk:the_ed17/Archive {{archivenum}}|index=User_talk:the_ed17/Archives|inc_cur=16|archivesize=300kb|archivelist=no|showheader=no}}

would be the correct line to put in, I think. Note index=user talk:the_ed17/Archives rather than just index=Archives. [[Sam Korn]] ^(smoddy) 09:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

Ed: I am working away on the AOT article. I noticed that the "Army of the Cumberland" page has a redirect from the shell "Department of the Cumberland" page. Could you please help me create a similar redirect page for "Department of the Tennesee" -- or help me figute out how to do it. Thank you. Hartfelt (talk) 22:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ed: I figured it out and took care of it. Thanks. Hartfelt (talk) 12:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter XVIII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 14:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.[reply]

Good luck in Round III. Cam ^(Chat) 20:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I don't think that I will make it no matter how much luck I have. :-) —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 05:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 471: / Line 471: @@
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Archives&action=history This] definitely doesn't look right, and I thought you would be interested. I also left a [[User_talk:Werdna#WerdnaBot|message]] for Werdna to alert him.  --[[User:R'n'B|R'n'B]] ([[User talk:R'n'B|call me]] Russ) 18:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 :I commented on Werdna's talk page and am removing the automatic archiving for now. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face">[[User:the_ed17|<font color="800000">Ed]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:the_ed17|<font color="800000">(Talk</font>]] • [[Special:Contributions/the_ed17|<font color="800000">Contribs)]]</small></font> 20:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
+::I saw this link on Werdna's talk page and I think I've found your solution...
+:::{{tlx|1=Werdnabot|2=type=size|3=age=10|4=target=User_talk:the_ed17/Archive&nbsp;<nowiki>{{archivenum}}</nowiki>|5=index=User_talk:the_ed17/Archives|6=inc_cur=16|7=archivesize=300kb|8=archivelist=no|9=showheader=no}}
+::would be the correct line to put in, I think.  Note <code>index=user talk:the_ed17/Archives</code> rather than just <code>index=Archives</code>. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] <sup>[[User talk:Sam Korn|(smoddy)]]</sup> 09:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 == Request for help ==