Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2013

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Military history
WikiProject
Main project page + talk
News & open tasks
Academy
Core work areas
Assessment
Main page
 → A-Class FAQ
 → B-Class FAQ
 → A-Class review requests
 → Assessment requests
 → Current statistics
 → Review alert box
Contests
Main page
 → Contest entries
 → Scoring log archive
 → Scoreboard archive
Coordination
Main page + talk
 → Handbook
 → Bugle newsroom talk
 → ACM eligibility tracking
 → Discussion alert box
Incubator
Main page
 → Current groups and initiatives
Special projects
Majestic Titan talk
Member affairs
Membership
Full list talk
 → Active / Inactive
 → Userboxes
Awards
Main page talk
 →A-Class medals
 →A-Class crosses
 → WikiChevrons w/ Oak Leaves
Resources
Guidelines
Content
Notability
Style
Templates
Infoboxes
 → Command structure doc · talk
 → Firearm cartridge doc · talk
 → Military award doc · talk
 → Military conflict doc · talk
 → Military installation doc · talk
 → Military memorial doc · talk
 → Military person doc · talk
 → Military unit doc · talk
 → National military doc · talk
 → Military operation doc · talk
 → Service record doc · talk
 → Militant organization doc · talk
 → Weapon doc · talk
Navigation boxes doc · talk
 → Campaignboxes doc · talk
Project banner doc · talk
Announcement & task box
 → Discussion alert box
 → Review alert box
Template design style doc · talk
Showcase
Featured articles 1512
Featured lists 149
Featured topics 41
Featured pictures 544
Featured sounds 69
Featured portals 5
A-Class articles 685
A-Class lists 40
Good articles 5,564
Automated lists
Article alerts
Most popular articles
New articles
Nominations for deletion
Task forces
General topics
Fortifications
Intelligence
Maritime warfare
Military aviation
Military culture, traditions, and heraldry
Military biography
Military historiography
Military land vehicles
Military logistics and medicine
Military memorials and cemeteries
Military science, technology, and theory
National militaries
War films
Weaponry
Nations and regions
African military history
Asian military history
Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history
Balkan military history
Baltic states military history
British military history
Canadian military history
Chinese military history
Dutch military history
European military history
French military history
German military history
Indian military history
Italian military history
Japanese military history
Korean military history
Middle Eastern military history
Nordic military history
North American military history
Ottoman military history
Polish military history
Roman and Byzantine military history
Russian, Soviet and CIS military history
South American military history
South Asian military history
Southeast Asian military history
Spanish military history
United States military history
Periods and conflicts
Classical warfare
Medieval warfare
Early Muslim military history
Crusades
Early Modern warfare
Wars of the Three Kingdoms
American Revolutionary War
Napoleonic era
American Civil War
World War I
World War II
Cold War
Post-Cold War
Related projects
Blades
Espionage
Firearms
Pritzker Military Museum & Library
Piracy
Ships
edit · changes
Tally
edit
Candidate Votes
Anotherclown 35
Arius1998 17
AustralianRupert 44
Cdtew 26
Cliftonian 22
Dank 32
Ed! 28
Hawkeye7 41
HJ Mitchell 30
Ian Rose 34
Nick-D 38
Peacemaker67 26
The ed17 30
Tomobe03 20
TomStar81 23

Overview

[edit]

This election is to appoint the project coordinator team for one year, from 29 September 2013 to 28 September 2014. Coordinators are generally responsible for maintaining all of the procedural and administrative aspects of the project. All of the coordinators, and especially the lead coordinator (or lead coordinators), serve as the designated points-of-contact for procedural issues and focus on specific areas requiring special attention. They are not, however, endowed with any special executive powers.

Responsibilities

[edit]

From Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators:

The primary responsibility of the project coordinators is the maintenance and housekeeping work involved in keeping the project and its internal processes running smoothly; this includes a variety of tasks, such as keeping the announcement and open task lists updated, overseeing the assessment and review processes, managing the proposal and creation of task forces, and so forth. There is fairly little involved that couldn't theoretically be done by any other editor, of course—in only a few places have the coordinators been explicitly written into a process—but, since experience suggests that people tend to assume that someone else is doing whatever needs to be done, it has proven beneficial to formally delegate responsibility for this administrative work to a specified group.

The coordinators also have several additional roles. They serve as the project's designated points of contact, and are explicitly listed as people to whom questions can be directed in a variety of places around the project. In addition, they have (highly informal) roles in leading the drafting of project guidelines, overseeing the implementation of project decisions on issues like category schemes and template use, and helping to resolve disputes and keep discussions from becoming heated and unproductive.

Practical information on coordinating may be found here and here.

The current coordinators are:

Name Position Standing for re-election?
Anotherclown Coordinator Yes
AustralianRupert Lead Coordinator Yes
Cplakidas Coordinator No
Dank Lead Coordinator Yes
Grandiose Coordinator No
Hawkeye7 Coordinator Yes
HJ Mitchell Coordinator Yes
Ian Rose Coordinator Yes
MarcusBritish Coordinator No
Nick-D Lead Coordinator Yes
Nikkimaria Coordinator No
The ed17 Coordinator Yes
TomStar81 Coordinator Yes

Election process

[edit]
  • Nomination period: 4 September to 23:59 (UTC) 14 September.
  • Voting period: 00:01 (UTC) 15 September to 23:59 (UTC) 28 September.
  • Any member of the project may nominate themselves for a position by adding their statement in the "Candidates" section below by the start of the election. The following boilerplate can be used:
=== Name ===

{{user|Name}}
: Statement goes here...

==== Comments and questions for Name ====

*''What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?''
**
*''What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?''
**

==== Votes in support of Name ====

#
  • The election will be conducted using simple approval voting. Any member of the project may support as many of the candidates as they wish. The candidate with the highest number of endorsements will become the lead coordinator (provided he or she is willing to assume the post); this position may be shared in the event that multiple candidates receive the highest number of endorsements. The remaining candidates with twenty or more endorsements will be appointed as coordinators to a maximum of fourteen appointments. The number of coordinators may be increased or reduced if there is a tie or near-tie for the last position.
  • Both project members and interested outside parties are encouraged to ask questions of the nominees or make general comments.

Candidates

[edit]
Voting is now concluded.

Current time is 09:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Anotherclown

[edit]

Anotherclown (talk · contribs)

I have been a MILHIST coordinator for the last year and will throw my hat into the ring for another year if the members of the project feel I can assist. Have been involved in the project since I started editing Wikipedia in late 2008 and am mostly interested in Australian military topics and have written a few GA and A class articles in this area. I have also been involved in reviewing at GA and A class (and a few FAs). I am fairly busy in real life so often struggle to do much of consequence but will help out with any co-ord tasks wherever I can if I get another guernsey. Anotherclown (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for Anotherclown

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • Suppose I have probably written a few articles that I'm not entirely unhappy about, including a few GAs and As (never taken anything to FA though). More than anything though I think it is probably more about contributing across the project than any one thing, including some of the more "boring" administrative work which we don't like doing but which needs to be done if we are serious about trying to maintain any sort of standards and keeping MILHIST running. Anotherclown (talk) 11:44, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I have a bit of experience with the project now so I guess I have an understanding of how it works and many of our key policies and procedures. Am willing to assist with a lot of the donkey work such as tagging and assessment, formatting, reviews, and welcoming new users. Anotherclown (talk) 10:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (additional question from talkpage) What were your goals at the beginning of your last term? Have you achieved most of them? Which failed and why? Which are running but could perform better? Will new goals base on the achieved goals of your last term?
    • Don't think I really had any set goals at the beginning of my last term other than to get to understand my role as a new coordinator, assist the rest of the team with completing our duties to keep the background machinery of the project running, and to not make too many errors. Certainly didn't have any grand designs or projects, although we did manage to get a backlog drive up and running (with some mixed results). Anotherclown (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (additional question from talkpage) What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • No specific goals other than to keep the project running as it has been (status quo ante bellum). Perhaps not the most inspiring of answers, but I think given the limited coordination resources we have had over the last few years, and the limited time available to us all as volunteers, this is probably realistic. Think we should work on getting the basics right, including some initiatives IRT recruitment, tagging and assessing, backlog reduction and content reviews, and would aim to be involved in all of these. Anotherclown (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Anotherclown

[edit]
  1. Support. Great work this year, especially with the backlog drive, but across the board with content and backroom stuff. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Because of the support he's given me. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support: Concedes only a few A and GA articles, but passes over excellent work as a reviewer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Absolutely. AC is one of those behind-the-scenes types who just quietly gets on with the job and does it well. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Good reviewer and coordinator MacEachan1 (talk) 05:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  8. Support: Excellent contributor, especially in terms of reviewing.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support:Always an immense help in reviewing, and apt to provide good advice. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support: Well-written articles. Bwmoll3 (talk) 18:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: Buistr (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support: Conscientious editor who knows the project inside out. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Per HJ. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Anthony Staunton (talk) 11:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support FitzColinGerald (talk) 12:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Aleutian06 (talk) 21:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support: No specific goals! I submit that "general" goals of IRT recruitment, tagging and assessing, backlog reduction and content reviews, are pretty "specific" for project improvement. Otr500 (talk) 14:52, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support: Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support A great all round contributor. Zawed (talk) 09:16, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support.auntieruth (talk) 18:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Keith-264 264 likes a geezerKeith-264 (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Rather than "often struggle to do much of consequence", I would have preferred "am one of the people most responsible for the growth and success of our review processes", but then you wouldn't be Anotherclown. - Dank (push to talk) 15:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Strong all rounder Irondome (talk) 22:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arius1998

[edit]

Arius1998 (talk · contribs)

I have been a member of this project since March 2012. And I first joined the project's contest in May of 2012. My major area of interest lies in Philippine military history, but I also conducted some work in some Asian topics, particularly that of Southeast and East Asia. Articles concerning European and American colonialism are also included in my interests. I have been a bit inactive though in the past few months, but I am determined to go back editing, especially in this project.

Comments and questions for Arius1998

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I'm particularly humble when it comes to bragging my few achievements to many people. So far I do it only on my profile, and barely any Wikipedian see it. I'd just state a few, since they are really few in number. Mariano Ricafort Palacin y Abarca and Antonio Luna are both B-class already, though they both failed to reach GA status. Miguel Malvar also achieved B-class. Macario Sakay I am working to be at least C-class. I had immersed myself in driving a campaign to complete articles of battles in Luzon during the Philippine-American War from Manila to Tirad Pass, with my aim to get them all to C or B-class the past year being near completion. I had finished six and improved two, increasing the number of articles concerning battles in Luzon during the said war by more than 80 percent. This time, I am more into improving articles of military people, like Sakay. I also participated in the March 2013 backlog drive, for which I received an award of three chevrons. I have also participated in peer reviews for good and featured articles in the October-December 2012 and January-March 2013 periods. Six of my eight DYK articles are related to this project.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • For me I believe that my few positive qualities, including being hardworking, and doing my best to cite references and fixing grammar well, I could contribute in this project. I'm not implying that my negatives outweigh my positives, and if it did, I could have been away from Wikipedia for good. However, what I'm trying to say is that I always do my best to get the job done, and that I believe is enough, as I have said the past year as well.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Arius1998

[edit]
  1. Support: I believe that Arius has the potential to become a good co-ord if elected. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: An administrator specialising in South East Asia would be a step forward. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: Diligent editor. Should have been elected last year. Will be very disappointed if he is side-stepped by the long-term regulars again, as there are no excuses this time. Ma®©usBritish{chat} 17:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Because I believe there is always a place for less experienced editors to learn the ropes. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Broadening the perspectives is always good. Intothatdarkness 21:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Openskye (talk) 01:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Per Hawkeye. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Taking time to check out Arius' work (I have no personal experience working with Arius), I've become quite confident there's a good coord in making!--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Has made some solid contributions. The project needs some of our newer editors to step up to keep it moving fwd. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. Srnec (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Brings a new set of interests and skills to the mix. auntieruth (talk) 18:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. I like the idea of having an coord who is editing articles not often travelled in MILHIST Land. If he's willing to give it a crack as a coord and he's willing to learn, I'm going to back him. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. I'm hoping Arius makes it to 20 votes. Nothing against any of the other candidates (and it looks like most will be elected), but I just want to get a couple of my votes logged here in case they make a difference and I don't get back to it before voting closes. Mojoworker (talk) 19:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Good luck mate Irondome (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AustralianRupert

[edit]

AustralianRupert (talk · contribs)

G'day, I have been a member of the Military history project since January 2009. My main area of interest in terms of writing is Australian military history, although I have tried to branch out in to a few other areas. Please feel free to view my listed contributions. I also regularly get involved with the copy editing and reviewing process, which has given me a broader perspective on the project's content. I have previously served as a co-ordinator in the March – September 2010, September 2010 – September 2011 and September 2012 – September 2013 tranches. During this time, I have really enjoyed the project's co-operative environment, particularly that which has been established within the project's A-class review system. Time after time, I have been amazed by the quality of editors we have here and the work that can be produced through collaboration; that said, equally I, perhaps like others, have begun to question the long term viability of Wikipedia. The dynamic nature of the encyclopedia has allowed us to create content that is very professional, but on the other hand that same nature has the ability to produce very real frustration in those that care perhaps just a little too much. I am a lapsed Catholic for very similar reasons and I suspect that one day – although probably not in the next year – I may also be a lapsed Wikipedian, only attending at Easter or Christmas...
That said, I continue to seek out those Wikipedia experiences that make it all worthwhile and long for something that will restore my faith. If I am elected, I will work in the following areas: closing A class reviews; helping to manage the monthly contest; providing advice; tagging new articles; adding task force parameters; responding to questions on the main project and co-ordinators' talk pages; and recruiting (and encouraging new recruits).

Comments and questions for AustralianRupert

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I hope that some of what I do is of benefit to the project, but I wouldn't use the word "proud". From a personal point of view, I could list some of the articles I've taken to FA, A or GA (you can view them here if you wish), although they pale into insignificance against some of my more esteemed colleagues. In terms of the project, though, I don't actually think that these are the most relevant in my case. From a project point of view, I think my contributions to mentoring new editors via the project's A-class review and the wider-Peer review/GA/FAC system are more beneficial. I will leave it up to the project members to decide whether any of it matters.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a Milhist coordinator?
    • I believe that I am experienced enough to understand how the project runs and knowledge/skills to undertake the tasks required of a co-ord. I am keen to ensure that the project's various housekeeping tasks are undertaken in a timely fashion and will continue to devote my time to helping out with these tasks and helping others learn how to do them if they want to learn.
  • (additional question from talkpage) What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • My main goal is simply to keep the project running, although I would also like to continue to expand the number of users who get involved in our A-class review process and improve our corporate knowledge about how the project works. I intend to do this by continuing to help new users as I come across them by providing advice/tutoring/mentoring and continuing to get involved in the project's housekeeping. I have no plans to develop new areas or task forces, although I'm more than happy to help others who wish to pursue this, if I can. That said, I think it is important to remember that this is a volunteer project and we all have limited time that we allocate to the project based on a complex variety of human factors; as such, there is often a limit to what can be achieved in terms of change. Sometimes "bite-and-hold" with limited objectives is a better strategy than pursuing a complete breakthrough...
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of AustralianRupert

[edit]
  1. Support. No doubt a great contributor in all aspects of the project, content and housekeeping. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Voting from my own perspective. Rupert has carried out his many tasks with aplomb and friendliness and it's been great working with him, even if my input was minimal. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: Rupert has been a great editor, collaborator and administrator. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Rupert's a seasoned veteran and one of the wisest editors in the project in my experience. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support — -dainomite   00:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: MacEachan1 (talk) 05:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  8. Support: Definitely a great all-round contributor to the project.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support:Has been a valuable resource during reviews, and clearly works hard. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support — Keep it up, good luck MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support TeriEmbrey (talk) 17:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Rupert is an excellent mentor for noobs like myself and a spot on editor, I'm glad he stood for office another year. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Buistr (talk) 20:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - Rupert has done a heck of a lot of work for the project, and he's done good managerial work as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support – A reliable, trustworthy editor and Coordinator. Adamdaley (talk) 23:49, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Openskye (talk) 01:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support: Aside from his dedication as a writer, reviewer, and coordinator, Rupert is always an encouraging voice for his fellow editors. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Yes please Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Anthony Staunton (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support:Tristan benedict (talk) 18:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support: Aleutian06 (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support: For his tireless contributions. Nishadhi (talk) 10:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support: Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Buckshot06 (talk) 21:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support He's put a huge amount of effort into the project in the last year. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Another excellent all round contributor. Zawed (talk) 09:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support Organizational memory, and great skill sets. auntieruth (talk) 18:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  36. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support wholeheartedly //Halibutt 08:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support My candidacy this year is doomed to fail, but I believe this one, who is by far better than I, must work on for this department this coming year. Arius1998 (talk) 10:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support Keith-264 264 likes this geezer tooKeith-264 (talk) 13:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support per Hchc (huge effort, especially this year). It's very hard to review content from so many different subject areas for so many different writers ... but Rupert makes it look like it's all in a day's work and no big deal, and that's his particular genius. - Dank (push to talk) 15:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support user:Dank puts it well/ Irondome (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cdtew

[edit]

Cdtew (talk · contribs)

Hello everyone, my name is Clark, and I have been an active member of MILHIST since December 5, 2012. I know, that makes me the new guy on the block, but in the time since December, I've not been asleep at the wheel. I've been able, with the help of virtually all of the coordinators nominated for re-election here, as well as from too many MILHIST editors to list, to write and/or develop 3 FA's (soon to be 4), 6 A-class articles, and 8 GA's (N.B. - the GA's I'm counting include articles that became A-class, and then FA) that fall in the MILHIST purview. I'm not technically a "new" Wikipedian, however. I joined in 2009, and edited through early 2010, but law school got in the way. Those days were not really significant, and, in my youthful fervor, I got caught up in silly content battles with a handful of other editors (although nothing that ever went to AN or for which any formal or informal sanctions were handed out - just nonconstructive bantering). With my new "incarnation" on Wikipedia, I came back primarily because my job in the law doesn't give me the opportunity to pursue my scholarly interests, and I have outgrown the need to get into content disputes, preferring compromise where doing so wouldn't go against consensus.
In 2009, the WP world seemed vibrant, and full of active Wikiprojects. When I returned, many of them seemed to be nothing but abandoned hulks, including WP:WNC, of which I was and am a member. Despite the bleakness of the Wikiproject landscape, I noticed that MILHIST was buzzing with activity, thanks in no small measure to its coordinators. That sense of community, reward, and encouragement hooked me into MILHIST, and here I am today. I will note that, due to my newness, I have no expectation of being made a coordinator unless the community wants that. I'm merely nominating myself because I want to be more involved in the community, and feel that I have a lot to contribute. I will not hold anyone's abstention against them, as I understand there is a preference for seniority. Additionally, IRL I'm a lawyer, and during busy periods (trials, appeals, brief-writing) I may find myself tied up in the real world and unable to be immediately responsive. Cdtew (talk) 15:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for Cdtew

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • My achievements have been humble to date, although I believe that I have really hit the ground running with regards to content. I tend to be a WikiDragon, so my edit count is probably comparably low to other editors of my WikiAge. That being said, I am most proud of having produced Featured, A-Class, and Good Article content on the Early Modern period of warfare. My project has been to make a Featured Topic out of North Carolina's Continental Army generals, and I am 2/5 (soon to be 3/5) of the way through making each general's article an FA. Each of those articles were either entirely written or entirely re-written by myself, and copy-edited and reviewed mostly by members of this project. To take a subject that surely very few people know much about, and to expand them in the amount of time I've been active has been fascinating and humbling for me.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • It appears to me that there are very few coordinators - and very few active members of this project remaining - who have an interest in Early Modern or pre-Modern warfare, in which interests I primarily focus. I hope that I would be a welcome, diverse addition to the coordination of the project in being able to reach out to editors who produce content fitting into those categories, but who may not actively participate in MILHIST. I believe there is talent out in the Wikisphere that isn't scouted thoroughly because they focus on non-military early modern or pre-modern topics, even though they might be able to be productive members of this project with some solicitation and encouragement. In addition, I am more than happy to perform any administrative task that needs attention.
  • Question from Talk: What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • I know I'm going to sound like a broken record, but my goal would be to reinvigorate and potentially consolidate the Early Modern task force, including by proposing to fold in related task forces. For instance, my first proposal would be folding in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, American Revolutionary War, part of the Early Muslim Military History, and potentially Napoleonic Wars task forces into an expanded "Early Modern" task force. Doing so would allow more editors to have a sense of camaraderie and community with editors working on subjects not too dissimilar to their own.
I would then seek to actively recruit persons to these seemingly withering task forces, who may be able to contribute on a semi-regular basis. The goal would not be, of course, to engage in any rivalry with the Modern Warfare or WWII editors here (without whom this project may not be what it is today), but to complement that side of the project. As I see it, the project's main weakness is its lack of pre-20th Century warfare content and editors. Clearly, this project has a stellar track record in 20th/21st century warfare, and I think the goals set by editors in the latter fields should serve as an aspirational mark for early modern editors. I also see no problem with a strong focus on GA and FA, and would like to participate as much as permissible in the ACR process, as I believe that is, hands-down, this project's greatest contribution to Wikipedia as a whole.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
    • Unfortunately, I could and would do nothing for a Klondike Bar. My new diet is mostly kale, parsnips, and seafood, and I'm actually enjoying it (wild blinking and gesticulation to indicate that I'm being forced at gunpoint to say these things, and would love a Klondike Bar).

Votes in support of Cdtew

[edit]
  1. Support. Solid, consistent contributor and I believe it would be good to have a coordinator with a pre-20th century focus. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: I've worked with Cdtew on a few articles/reviews and I believe they would make a good addition to the project's co-ords. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: Would make a good coordinator. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Clark is dedicated and passionate about his subject area, exactly the sort of enthusiasm and new blood we need on the coord team. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:18, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: per Peacemaker.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Widening perspectives also comes in time periods as well as geographic location or focus. Good addition. Intothatdarkness 21:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support – An editor who is honest. Cdtew would be a great Coordinator. Adamdaley (talk) 23:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: Clark is one of the most impressive of our newer editors, and will make a great addition to the coord team. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Minorly floored that there aren't more supports here. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Thank you for standing Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support A solid contributor well versed in the review process. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support I've enjoyed working with him over the last year. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support I have worked with Clark on a couple of reviews and think he would be a great asset to the team. Zawed (talk) 09:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support I think he will be a great addition to the coordinators, bringing a new perspective. Woody (talk) 19:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support My candidacy this year is doomed to fail, but I believe this one, who is by far better than I, must work on for this department this coming year. Arius1998 (talk) 10:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. Your comment to me was quite kind, but probably off the mark: you were obviously a really good writer before you ever got here, and we're quite lucky to have you. - Dank (push to talk) 15:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Irondome (talk) 21:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cliftonian

[edit]

Cliftonian (talk · contribs)

Hello all, the name's John. I have a rather international backstory and the short version is that I was I was born in England and am now in the Israeli Army. Nick-D suggested that I might be a good candidate for this so I'm giving it a shot. I've been a part of the project for about two years now, and as some of you might be aware my major focus is Rhodesian/Zimbabwean military and political history. I contribute a fair amount of content, but also do quite a bit of behind-the-scenes type of work, such as adding WikiProject and taskforce templates to articles, categories and the like. I consider myself quite familiar with this kind of thing and with the review process, having contributed at a few FACs, GANs, PRs etc. I should probably warn that other commitments might prevent me from being on call 24/7, as it were, but my present posting rarely ties me up off-WP for more than a couple days—I keep the userpage banner up there ("is regularly off Wikipedia for sustained periods") basically just because that could always change at short notice.

Comments and questions for Cliftonian

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I feel that I am familiar with most of the kind of work that would be required and that I could generally do the job well while still contributing content. I have quite a bit of reviewing experience and enjoy helping other contributors with reviews, copy-edits and the like. When called upon to help I always do my best to do so promptly and properly. With my background and areas of interest I think my addition to the team might also bring it a bit of fresh insight and diversity.
  • (additional question from Bomzibar on talkpage) What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • I intend to continue developing the Africa task force and might branch into the more general World War I area with the centenary coming up. I think quality content is something we should take pride in and so see no reason to "cool down" the project from emphasising GA and FA. I am always interested in assisting newer contributors when the opportunity presents itself and this is something I would like to continue.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Cliftonian

[edit]
  1. Support. Great worker, contributes consistently and has interests in a region not often travelled. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: I'm very impressed with Cliftonian's contributions and welcome his offer to serve as a co-ord. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: Valuable, not to mention badly needed, contributions to African articles. Brigade Piron (talk) 21:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: More diversity. Great article writer too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Like Clark, John is the sort of enthusiastic new blood we need to keep things going, and he writes great articles on a complex and difficult subject. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: Has made great contributions to the project and will make a good coord.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: As a fellow contributor who feels like he's working a particular row alone, I appreciate John's dedication. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support: John is a courageous and dedicated editor, and a great contributor to discussion; will make a fine coord. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Thank you for standing Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support A dedicated and fastidious contributor with a good understanding of the MOS and other policies etc (and technical ability). A unique background that will bring new ideas to the project. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. Srnec (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. Whoa Mohammed!! Buckshot06 (talk) 22:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Enthusiastic and hard working. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support My candidacy this year is doomed to fail, but I believe this one, who is by far better than I, must work on for this department this coming year. Arius1998 (talk) 10:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. I particularly like that you've broadened your focus over the last year. - Dank (push to talk) 15:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Helping to broaden knowledge of the relatively little known Rhodesian war, interesting background with good potential. Irondome (talk) 21:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dank

[edit]

Dank (talk · contribs)

Hi, I'm Dan, a long-time Milhist coordinator and admin. I have earned my keep around here mostly by copyediting or prose-reviewing almost all of our Featured and A-class articles, and I'll continue to cover A-class and Peer Review, but I'm currently taking a break from FAC to work on copyediting software. I'm also a part-time Metapedian, and that's been useful for bringing new people into the project and deflecting problems, so that article writers don't have to deal with too many surprises. I've stayed pretty busy on Wikipedia for almost six years; you can find out about my opinions and activities by wandering around my userspace, or searching for my username at our main talk page and archives or the coordinators' talk page and archives.

Comments and questions for Dank

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • Wikipedia remains the most-viewed site on the web that isn't operating primarily as a search engine or community portal. You'd think that a massive readership would be gratification enough for serious writers, but many Wikipedians stop writing over time unless other Wikipedians actually read what they're writing and discuss it. Woody Allen says that "eighty percent of success is just showing up", and the most useful thing I've done is to just show up, in Milhist review processes and in Wikipedia discussions generally.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • It's not really for me to say what's skillful and what's just me doing my thing; feel free to check how people responded in my talk archives and come to your own conclusions. Regardless of the quality, I can certainly claim a large quantity of copyediting and article reviewing over the last six years. In addition to reviewing, I enjoy closing some of the more contentious RfCs, and I'll continue that work. My regular wiki-maintenance tasks include the quarterly content policy updates.
  • What were your goals at the beginning of your last term? Have you achieved most of them? Which failed and why? Which are running but could perform better? Will new goals base on the achieved goals of your last term?
  • What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • Wikipedia wouldn't work without a lot of brilliant, self-directed people, but that means we continually suffer from "too many chiefs". I'm not here to tell people what task forces or projects they should pursue; I'll pitch in and help if new, viable efforts develop. The Good Article and Featured Article processes are wildly successful by any measure, especially for Milhist, but I don't think Milhist is focused on them to the exclusion of other articles.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Dank

[edit]
  1. Support. Major contributor over many years, helpful across the board. It is good to have a couple of coordinators who are working on higher level areas outside the project. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:37, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: Has been a great asset to the project and I'm delighted Dank as agreed to nominate again. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: Another great contributor. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Dan, you're fantastic. Your copy-editing has enhanced countless articles and you have the drive to keep things going. I sometimes wish you'd spend more time doing a few things really well rather than trying to be everywhere, but you've been a great lead coord. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:12, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support — -dainomite   00:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: MacEachan1 (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  8. Support: I seem to remember his opposition to a FAC I posted on the basis of inadequate prose and respect him all the more for it. I'm sure the project will be in good hands with him as a coord.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: What could I say about Dan? Quite frankly, without his support and encouragement, I don't think I would have amounted to much as an editor. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support:Good luck! TeriEmbrey (talk) 17:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. Indeed. Go for it! -- Alexf(talk) 18:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Buistr (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support: Aside from his talents as editor and reviewer, Dan is one of those people who really holds the project together. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Full support, with the same wish as HJ. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support An experienced co-ordinator and an excellent contributor, dedicated to improving our articles. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support — ΛΧΣ21 05:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Excellent and prolific copyeditor and great all round guy. Your FAC contributions will no doubt be missed. Keep up the good work keeping the meta sane. Doug (talk) 14:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Always quick to provide encouragement or support. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Woody (talk) 19:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support A great asset Irondome (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ed!

[edit]

Ed! (talk · contribs)

I've been a Wikipedia editor since about 2006, and a member of this project for most of that time, though I've never been a coordinator. Most of the time I've been here I've focused on article writing and reviewing, though I have preferred to write and review a variety of topics within the scope of military history. It's been great seeing the project evolve over the years and I've love to be a positive part of it. —Ed!(talk) 15:07, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for Ed!

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I would say I'm most proud of the breadth of articles I've covered in my years here. My interests have changed a lot and I've continued to push to do new kinds of articles within the auspices of military history. My user page has a complete list, but in the past seven years, I've done work on articles about dozens of military units, I put together a series of 30 articles extensively covering a phase of the Korean War, I've written about battleships, Medal of Honor recipients, flying aces, and high-profile generals. I've also worked on some areas that have received very little coverage on Wikipedia, including war crimes, military logistics, military politics and, as far as I know, the only article about North Korea ever to become a featured article.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I review a lot of articles on a variety of military history subjects, which I hope could be helpful. My time with this project has given me a great deal of familiarity with it. I've been heavily focused on content production and quality control over my history with the project and hope that will help me work with newcomers in developing their articles.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Ed!

[edit]
  1. Support. Ed! is a great contributor, and an excellent reviewer. Would be a great addition to the team. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: Another great contributor. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I was fooled by the relatively low number of candidates into thinking we had a shallow pool, but anything but. Ed is yet another fantastic editor offering to serve as a coord for the first time, and I've no doubt he'd do an excellent job. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:32, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support — -dainomite   00:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Excellent contributor, both in terms of reviewing and content contributions, great asset to the MILHIST project.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support: A high-visibility project member, with a lot to contribute. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: noclador (talk) 17:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Indeed! -- Alexf(talk) 18:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: Ed! has always been very supportive as a reviewer, and I think that his sense of organisation would transfer very well to a role in the project. Miyagawa (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support: God knows we don't see eye-to-eye on the subject of medal farms, but Ed's dedication to articles on the "forgotten war" of Korea, and his general experience here, makes for good coord material. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:32, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support A very consistent contributor. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support An experienced and approachable editor who would add a new dimension to the co-ordinator team. Zawed (talk) 09:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support.auntieruth (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Woody (talk) 19:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support, particularly for all your work as an article reviewer. - Dank (push to talk) 16:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Irondome (talk) 21:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7

[edit]

Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs)

Hi, I'm Ross. The name Hawkeye7 comes from a loud mouthed and abrasive comic book character I was fond of as a kid. The seven is from my favourite TV show. I write a lot of biographical articles, and like technical subjects. Lately, I've been involved in improving articles related to the Manhattan Project.

Comments and questions for Hawkeye7

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I was 2012 Military historian of the year. That accolade meant a lot, coming from my peers in the project.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I have a Masters degree in Australian military history . I wrote a thesis about World War I. And a PhD in the same, writing an even larger thesis on World War II. So I know a fair bit about Military History. At last count, I have I have written 29 Featured Articles, 64 A class Articles, and 116 Good Articles. Most of these are on military subjects, although I write about other subjects occasionally. You can see the details on my user page. It is not so much about keeping score as keeping track of what I am working on. I can also write Bots, which is a useful life skill around here.
  • What were your goals at the beginning of your last term?
    • I did not actually set any goals last term. I've spent most of the year on my personal goal of improving the Manhattan Project articles.
  • What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • What I would like to do in 2014 is get some bots running to produce metrics. We need to be able to demonstrate what we are accomplishing, and what progress is being made.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Hawkeye7

[edit]
  1. Support. Consistent, hard-working and helpful. A major contributor to the outward success of the project who also does a lot of backroom work. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. My vote goes to Hawkeye because of the useful way he interfaces with others, including me. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: excellent contributions as a co-ord (probably closed the most ACRs last year) and as a writer. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support — -dainomite   00:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Without doubt. One of the most prolific and dedicate military historians on Wikipedia. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Excellent coordinator MacEachan1 (talk) 05:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  8. Support: Hard-working and overall constructive contributor.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: Always appears willing to lend a hand, and provide astute advice. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support — Categorical imperative, good luck MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, blew me away with the excellent work on United States v. The Progressive, which went on to WP:FA quality. — Cirt (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support -- Has stood the test of time and effort. His contributions are staggering -- One of the biggest, if not the biggest, contributors to military history articles. He must have ten hands to type with. -- Gwillhickers 18:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Hawk's not bashful about lending a hand when my hands freeze up on the keyboard... Cuprum17 (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support: Goes without saying pretty much. Miyagawa (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - Serious content contributor and all around helpful guy. Has proven himself trustworthy with managerial duties. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support: One of the most prodigious editors, a dedicated B-Class reviewer and ACR closer, and a professional to boot -- how could you not? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support:scout1067 (talk) 06:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Thanks for closing all those ACRs! Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Anthony Staunton (talk) 11:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support: Aleutian06 (talk) 21:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Who else is going to close our ACRs? Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support Doug (talk) 15:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support: Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Buckshot06 (talk) 22:06, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  35. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Keith-264 another geezerKeith-264 (talk) 13:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. I'm amazed by your output. - Dank (push to talk) 16:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support Irondome (talk) 21:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HJ Mitchell

[edit]

HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs)

Hi, I'm Harry. I've been neglecting my coordinator duties lately because of real-life issues, but if you'll have me back again, I'll do my best in the coming year to devote more time to them. I've been a coord for the last two years, and it has been a great honour to serve the project in that capacity. I've enjoyed doing the few things that are delegated to coordinators specifically, such as closing ACRs (something I was doing quite actively earlier in the year) and the occasional spot of 'firefighting' when an issue is raised on the coords' talk page. I've also written quite a lot of content within the scope of the project, and I've been an active reviewer at FAC and ACR, something I've particularly enjoyed, given the volume and variety of interesting subjects that come through those venues. I'm also fairly well-known in real life. I'm an active volunteer for the UK chapter, and I'm a regular at many of the meetups in the UK, so I sometimes find myself advocating for MilHist in those settings. Outside of MilHist, I've been an admin on enwiki for about three years, I relatively recently became an admin on Commons, and I'm an OTRS agent. I feel I'm a 'safe pair of hands' and an experienced editor with skills that can benefit the project, and that I've been a useful member of the coord team over the last couple of years, even if I haven't always been as active as I'd like, and that I would continue to be such if re-elected. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:38, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for HJ Mitchell

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • As mentioned above, I'm proud of some of my intangible contributions, like the 'firefighting' when issues are raised on talk pages, and I'm proud of the effort I've put into closing ACRs and other behind-the-scenes activities. But the most tangible and recognisable contribution I've made is the content I've written, and in particular, my five featured articles. Two of those (Operation Barras and British military intervention in the Sierra Leone Civil War) I wrote this year, and I'm especially pleased with the latter. It's quite a long article, some might find it a little dry, and the title's a bit of a mouthful, but I think it's an important article—without wishing to sound pompous, I think it's the best summary of that campaign that so far exists anywhere, and it's the only detailed account of it on the Internet (to the best of my knowledge). I was pleased when it was featured on the main page last month, and I'd like to write some more article on the Sierra Leone Civil War in general, because I think it's an important but slightly overlooked topic. I'm also proud of Edward Charles Ingouville-Williams, an article I wrote at a WWI editathon earlier in June, and I'm still proud to be the author of the article on the Iranian Embassy siege, one of my older FAs.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I'm an experienced editor and admin who is familiar with most areas of the project. I'm also an admin on Commons and an OTRS agent. It's occasionally useful to have somebody wearing two or more of those hats, and for members of the project to have a coordinator they know they can approach with an issue concerning one of the other roles (for example, a project member might upload a file to Commons, only for it to be deleted and and then become the subject of an OTRS ticket that confirms it's properly licensed). I'm also generally a fairly relaxed person, and I try (not always successfully!) not to let too much phase me, so I'm quite good at reminding people that something isn't the end of the world, and I can sometimes help de-escalate a dispute where otherwise sensible editors have lost perspective.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of HJ Mitchell

[edit]
  1. Support. Harry was very active early in the year, less so recently (we all have RW issues on occasion). Not only a major contributor, but very helpful and friendly, and it is useful to have admins that work outside the project on the coordinator team and in the RW of WP Chapters, as it gives us perspective on how we sit in WP as a whole. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: per Peacemaker. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per Peacemaker. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support: Good contributor and reviewer. MacEachan1 (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  6. Support: per Peacemaker.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: per Peacemaker. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support: Harry J. Mitchell is responsible and responsive at all times--conscientious and straightforward. Rammer (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. per Peacemaker. -- Alexf(talk) 18:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support A valuable contributor. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 18:47, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Openskye (talk) 01:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support: Per Rammer, and I've always admired Harry's work as an editor (more please!). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Doug (talk) 14:37, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support: Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support A calm and productive voice. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Woody (talk) 19:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. Your work with WMUK has been, and I expect will be, enormously helpful for Milhist. - Dank (push to talk) 16:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Irondome (talk) 21:42, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose

[edit]

Ian Rose (talk · contribs)

This year I'm going write something without checking/copying what I wrote last year and the year before that and the year before that... ;-) I'm another of those pesky Aussies who's been here for donkey's years. I think I started editing on WP around 2006, and got involved with MilHist not long after that. I've been a coordinator for quite a few years, edit the Bugle with Nick-D, and also help run the FAC process. My specialty as an editor is Australian military aviation, particularly biography. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for Ian Rose

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I've managed to take a good many articles to GA, A-Class and FA, and particularly enjoyed my collaborations with other editors on some of these. I'm proud to have generally been among the top ten reviewers every quarter, to have helped bring the Bugle to you each month for a couple of years and, I hope, to have encouraged editors in their chosen fields and, in some cases, to become fellow coordinators.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I'd like to think that my many years here have shown my experience, enthusiasm, level head, and sense of humour, all attributes that I believe help make a decent coordinator.
  • Additional question from talk page: What were your goals at the beginning of your last term? Have you achieved most of them? Which failed and why? Which are running but could perform better? Will new goals base on the achieved goals of your last term?
    • The pressing concerns I mentioned this time last year were to "continue to encourage new members; review, review, review; and always guard against complacency within our great wikiproject by keeping watch on the evolution of processes and projects outside MilHist". Although I haven't actively recruited anyone, I hope I've always encouraged promising editors, and I've certainly done my share of reviewing. As far as keeping an eye on processes and projects outside MilHist, I've maintained my role in the FAC process, which offers another perspective.
  • Additional question from talk page: What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • My goals are pretty well the same as ever: encourage editors old and new, review like hell, and try to maintain a collegial and collaborative atmosphere.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Ian Rose

[edit]
  1. Support. Ian has been very active both in and outside the project all year, and is helpful and welcoming. Major contributor, generally always figures in the monthly contest and it is useful to have a coordinator that is very familiar with the FAC process. His contribution with the Bugle has been excellent. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: The big question in my mind is that if we're all "drinking buddies" of Ian's, when is it going to be his shout? Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. You can't have a coord team without Ian—he's part of the furniture! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: Agrees with Peacemaker67 MacEachan1 (talk) 05:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan![reply]
  7. Support: Very helpful and hard working contributor - a great asset of the project.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support: Always a source of wisdom and guidance, and a friendly face at FAC, so happy to support. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support — Yes, good luck MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support: Ian is transparent and industrious. He has demonstrated eclectic knowledge of military subjects, widely ranging from music to off-duty behavior of soldiers etc. You always know what you're getting with Ian. Rammer (talk) 17:18, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: Per Rammer. Miyagawa (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support: Excellent and accomplished writer of military history. Has created many biographies you'll likely not find anywhere else, helping to make Wikipedia that much more unique as a source of military history. -- Gwillhickers 22:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Per Peacemaker. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Anthony Staunton (talk) 12:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support — ΛΧΣ21 05:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Cuprum17 (talk) 16:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Strong Support! Knowlegeable, genial, and ALWAYS available to help such benighted contributors such as myself.Georgejdorner (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support A very strong contributor. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Another vital all rounder, and always in good cheer. Zawed (talk) 09:30, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. For those project members who aren't familiar with the review process for featured articles, Ian's role there (as one of two active coordinators) may be the most demanding single job on Wikipedia ... and Ian takes it all in stride. He's constantly cheerful, encouraging and humble ... and immensely competent. In his "spare" time, he's also been one of the most hardworking coords at Milhist, for years. Thanks, Ian, from the bottom of my heart. - Dank (push to talk) 16:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 08:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Irondome (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D

[edit]

Nick-D (talk · contribs)

I've been a coordinator for most of the time since 2008 (I did not stand in 2010 or 2011), and have served as one of the lead coordinators for the last year. I have also been a member of the project since 2006. In addition to performing the various coordinator roles, I'm the current co-editor of the project's newsletter, The Bugle, and regularly review A-class and FA nominations and provide comments in peer reviews. I have also contributed to many military history articles, with a focus on Australian military history and the history of World War II.
I am standing for re-election as I think that I've made a useful contribution in my previous periods as a coordinator, and would like to continue to volunteer my services. I think that the main priorities facing the project are engaging new editors (especially if the visual editor tool acts to improve editor inflow, which I expect will be the case - the early indications I've seen are very promising), continuing to encourage experienced editors to stick around and re-invigorating our review processes. The coordinators will also have a role to play in connecting editors with the various Wikimedia chapter-sponsored events which are being put in place to mark the centenary of World War I; there may also be scope to build other links with chapters.

Comments and questions for Nick-D

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I am most proud of the 25 articles I've developed, or played a major role alongside other editors in developing, to FA standard. I am also proud of of the many articles I've developed to A-class and GA standard (many of which have since gone on to FA standard). I particularly enjoyed working on the articles which were collaborations. As noted above, I also think that I've made a useful contribution as a coordinator, including as one of the joint leads this year, by keeping the administrative side of the project ticking over. In addition, I've enjoyed working on The Bugle with Ian Rose and I hope that I've helped to maintain the high standards set by previous editors.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I have extensive experience as a coordinator, and hopefully have not become set in my ways or a barrier to new ideas, so I can offer my skills in carrying out administrative tasks and contributing to discussions. I also have experience editing a wide range of military history topics and extensive knowledge of the field (particularly on post-industrial era warfare). While it is in no way a prerequisite for the coordinator role, I am also hold the administrator tools,and can combine them with coordinator duties to contribute to dispute resolution or performing housekeeping tasks when necessary.
  • If you are a Coordinator running for reelection: What were your goals at the beginning of your last term? Have you achieved most of them? Which failed and why? Which are running but could perform better? Will new goals base on the achieved goals of your last term?
    • In the election last year, I stated that "I think that the main priority for the project over the next year will continue to be encouraging editor retention (including through supporting new editors and helping experienced editors remain motivated). Other priorities include revitalizing the A and B class review processes and trying to figure out a solution to the perennial problem of how to keep special projects going." Taking these in order, I've tried to contribute to editor retention through posting congratulatory messages on talk pages, contributing to reviews and encouraging collegial discussions. I think that this has been successful, though issues around editor retention obviously require a much broader effort from all editors. In regards to the reviews, I've encouraged editors to nominate worthy articles for A-class status and have contributed to many reviews. I also participated in the recent B-class assessment drive, and provided some very minor support for setting it up I'd rate this as partially successful as there seems to be a slowing of participation in ACRs and B-class reviews. In regards to the special projects: no success. I've continued to support WP:OMT and have provided advice to several editors considering new projects, but all the special projects are defunct.
  • What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • I covered these goals in the second paragraph of my nomination statement. I'm particularly interested in encouraging the new editors which visual editor is attracting to "stick". My experiance with this tool so far has been positive, as new registered and IP accounts are making much higher quality edits than was the case in the past, which should be encouraging them to remain interested in Wikipedia.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Nick-D

[edit]
  1. Support. Nick is pretty much everywhere, lots of reviewing and major contributions. His work on the Bugle is a key part of the project. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per Peacemaker. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support — -dainomite   00:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I'd love to say something original, but Peacemaker beat me to it, so er, what he said! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: Good reviewer and contributor MacEachan1 (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  8. Support: per Peacemaker.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: Your work throughout the project helps lend it the vitality so many other projects are lacking. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support: noclador (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. Indeed! -- Alexf(talk) 18:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Anyone who encourages new responsible editorship has my attention... Cuprum17 (talk) 18:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. Nick devotes a lot of time to Wikipedia. I appreciate his efforts to improve the project.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support' - Always a voice of reason both inside and outside MilHist, serious content contributor, has shown himself trustworthy in administrative and managerial tasks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support – Always a great editor, administrator and WP:MILHIST Coordinator. Adamdaley (talk) 23:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support: Aside from his dedicated editing, reviewing, coord and Bugle work, Nick is simply one of the clearest-thinking people on the project. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support: Euryalus (talk) 03:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. No words needed beyond 'needs to be lead coordinator'. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support MarshalN20 | Talk 01:05, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support The challenges faced by new editors are indeed daunting. Doug (talk) 14:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support: Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support A stalwart. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support The man contributes just about everywhere to the project. Zawed (talk) 09:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  33. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. Barring a late surge in the voting, it looks like you won't be co-lead coordinator this time, which is a shame ... you did even more this year than before, and you were outstanding in the role. Your monthly book reviews are my favorite part of the Bugle. - Dank (push to talk) 17:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Has undertaken much on his shoulders, always helpful and approachable. Great work ongoing in the Bugle. Irondome (talk) 21:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peacemaker67

[edit]

Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs)

G'day all (whoops, bit of a giveaway, another bloody Australian...). I've been a member of the project for getting close to two years now, and have about 20,000 edits on the clock so far. Fairly early on I started doing some routine coordinator-type tasks, like helping maintain the Announcements template, assessing and adding taskforces to new articles etc. I do a fair bit of assessing at ACR and GAN, and have tried my hand at PRs and even FAC a few times, and find I learn something new each time. I've also been doing other pretty mundane stuff like mentioning ACRs on the Coord talk page when they have three supports, and fixing problems with syntax in the MILHIST banner (still haven't mastered that, thankfully we have Kirill). I do a fair amount of content work, almost exclusively within the Balkan and WWII taskforces, and have contributed to seven FAs and 12 or so A-class articles and lists. That's the long version. The short version is I am already doing some coord work, and am up for learning more, and I have a bit of time on my hands these days (being a little older than the average bear).

Comments and questions for Peacemaker67

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • User:PRODUCER and I co-founded Operation Bora, which is a fledgling special project focused on Yugoslavia in WWII. It is doing really well, we've attracted several non-MILHIST members to sign-up, and we've currently got over 30% of the 117 targeted articles at B-class or better, including nearly 15% at MILHIST A-class or FA. Strictly speaking, it is part of WP Yugoslavia, but the benefit to MILHIST has been fairly significant already. As a collaboration between WPMILHIST and WP Yugoslavia, it is a potential means of widening interest in MILHIST while giving other WikiProjects a shot in the arm, and the idea might bear consideration for collaborations with other WikiProjects. I've also collaborated and co-nominated with several other editors on FAs and MILHIST A-class articles, and there is no doubt in my mind that I do my best work when I'm working alongside someone.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I am a quick learner, a self-starter, and am already familiar with some of the more mundane work. I know who to ask if I don't know the answer to a query. I also have a thick skin and am persistent (which helps when you edit Balkans articles, but I feel they might be useful attributes in a coord as well). I have some experience in reviewing (and having articles I've worked on reviewed) at ACR, our highest level of assessment, within the WikiProject, and I think that I have a good sense of where we see our ACR process fitting into the overall WP assessment scale (in terms of relative quality).
  • Additional question from User:Bomzibar (see talk). What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • My goals are in two areas, making a sustained contribution to the day-to-day administration of the project (reducing backlogs, keeping the announcement template up-to-date, ACR closures, reviews etc), and trying to encourage new members through expansion of the reviewing contest to include GANs so non-MILHIST editors receive recognition from us for reviewing MILHIST articles, which will hopefully nudge them to join (especially if followed up by an invitation to join us). I also think there is some scope for attracting members through cross-WikiProject work like Operation Bora (described above). I don't think there is an issue with the project that needs to be "cooled down" per se. What I would like to see is more encouragement by the project towards collaborations developing good and featured topics, something I am now working on myself.
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Peacemaker67

[edit]
  1. Support: I have no doubt Peacemaker will make a fine co-ord. He has demonstrated his commitment to the project undertaking a lot of behind-the-scenes work recently and has also managed to write quite a few "half-way decent" articles ;-) AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: Another bloody Australian. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. What is it with you Aussies? Still, anyone who can work in the areas Peacemaker does and keep their cool clearly has the right temperament to be a coord. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support: Agrees with AustralianRupert; from what I've seen, he is a dedicated MilHist folk MacEachan1 (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  6. Support: I have only the utmost respect for even-handedness and great efforts contributed by Peacemaker, specifically in Operation Bora. I wish there were more projects like that one and more editors like him.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support: This guy is a content-creating beast, not only in doing so himself, but inspiring others to create. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support -- Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: Per Harry Mitchell, Tomobe, actually all of the above! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Thank you for standing Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support For a newish editor he has learnt fast. Excellent contributions, outstanding attention to detail (institutionalized most likely), a good understanding of our policy and standards, good technical skills and already does a lot of co-ord 'type' work anyway. Would be a real asset. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 17:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support: Chris Troutman (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Another relative fresh face who I think would be a fantastic co-ordinator. Has impressed me with his level headed contributions to the contentious Balkans-themed articles. Zawed (talk) 09:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. You've already been doing coord work as competently as any of us, and your article work is exceptional. - Dank (push to talk) 17:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Great all rounder, takes on much work. Our Balkans spec. Civil and calm. Irondome (talk) 21:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ed17

[edit]

The ed17 (talk · contribs)

Hello everyone! My username is The ed17, but most call me Ed. I've been an active editor of Wikipedia since March 2008. I joined Milhsit fairly quickly and was one of three co-opted coordinators in November 2008 before being elected in my own right in March 2009. Other significant points in my wiki-history include my first featured article in October 2008, becoming an administrator in September 2009, and becoming editor-in-chief of the Signpost in May 2012. I have also spent quite a bit of time writing articles; I have authored or co-authored twenty-three featured articles and eleven A-class or good articles over the last five years.

Comments and questions for The ed17

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • It hasn't changed from last year, nor do I think it will change for awhile—the South American dreadnought race series with Sturmvogel is what I'm most proud of, and the eponymous article is still my pet favorite. I'm also extremely happy with the changes I was able to bring to our project newsletter, the Bugle, over my nearly two years of editing it.
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • I've been a coordinator for nearly five years now, so I bring a lot of experience and institutional memory to the table. I am also hoping that we can get a group of Milhisters together to collaborate with GLAM institutions.
    • That said, given my real life (pushed grad school back by a year to save money = three jobs) and Wikipedia (Signpost) work commitments, I may not be the most active coordinator, and they certainly prevent me from taking a leading role in a GLAM collaboration.
  • With your increasing RL workload and on-Wiki responsibilities, do you consider yourself to have enough time for another on-Wiki task
    • Thanks Crisco for the question! My RL workload will be decreasing slightly in about three weeks, and I have no plans to take on additional roles in the Wikimedia movement. With that in mind, I believe that I have enough time to continue as a coordinator, should the Milhist community want me to. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of The ed17

[edit]
  1. Support. Brings heaps of experience with the project to the table, outside work with the Signpost. It is important to have long-time contributors in the team, especially if we are going to bring some fresh blood in. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: Has the experience that the project needs to keep going. Thanks for putting your hat into the ring. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: MacEachan1 (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  5. Support: per AustralianRupert.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: The ed17 has seemed to me during my short time here to be such a behind-the-scenes workhorse, we'd be silly not to continue with him as a coord. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. Indeed! -- Alexf(talk) 18:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. —Simon Harley (Talk | Library). 18:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support: To be fair, as long as Ed wants to be involved as a coordinator then I'm more than happy to support him. A quality contributor to the project and beyond. Miyagawa (talk) 20:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support: Per Miyagawa. Ed's an institution round here... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support - Quality EDitor, and if he thinks he has time to coordinate then I see no reason why he shouldn't. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support — ΛΧΣ21 05:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Doug (talk) 14:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Kierzek (talk) 14:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. Srnec (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support A great contributor. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  25. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. You've been a role model for me as a Wikipedian. You make good use of your position at the Signpost to illuminate what's happening with Wikipedia and the free-content movement in general, and you're a consistently reasonable voice as a Milhist coord. I can't imagine how you get it all done. - Dank (push to talk) 17:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support - Nikkimaria (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Irondome (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tomobe03

[edit]

Tomobe03 (talk · contribs)

I have been a member of this project since January 2012 thinking I might expand coverage of the Balkan Wars. I ended up editing a number of articles on Yugoslav wars, especially those events related to Croatia - primarily because I have access to literature and can read whatever language local coverage was made available in. I really enjoy contributing to the MILHIST project because it is very active and responsive to editors willing to contribute and cooperate in general, and this really motivates me to do more (time permitting).--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions for Tomobe03

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • I'm not really sure. I try to improve writing style, referencing format or presentation in each new article or significantly edited article I tackle. Nonetheless, I think I felt the best about contributing to improvement of the Action of 1 November 1944 prompted by a B-class assessment request, together with the requesting editor, and then proceeding to write the HMS Aldenham (L22) article from scratch because the first article led me to discover that the Aldenham was the last Royal Navy destroyer lost in the WWII yet it had no article on wiki! It felt quite right to get the both of the articles to GA, so perhaps this would be the proper answer here.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • Although I have zero experience as a coordinator of this project (or any other project for that matter), I'm willing to assist in assessment and reviews - and whatever else need be done. I think I have a fair grasp on key policies and by now understand that cooperation is the key to successfulness of any project of size comparable to the MILHIST. Finally, I'm willing to learn, and fill in any gaps in knowledge required from a coordinator.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What goals do you have for the following term? Keep the MilHist-Project running? Developing new areas and task forces? Any projects to increase the number of project-members or cool down the project from its strong focus on GAs and FAs?
    • I would like to see more editors joining in to produce greater number of, preferably high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. I think national wikiprojects are a possible resource for such an expansion of MILHIST editor ranks which would allow broader coverage of topics which have received limited coverage so far. I hope to find a number of editors out there who might discover an interest in military history and contribute.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (additional question for the sake of critical thinking/lightening the mood) What would you do for a Klondike Bar?

Votes in support of Tomobe03

[edit]
  1. Support. Has really hit the ground running (having done a significant amount of work on Roads articles before coming to us), has good experience with GAN and ACR and reviewing at GAN level. Great to have another persistent editor working to improve articles in the Balkans space. Major contributor to the June backlog drive and regular entrant in the monthly contest. Fresh blood and enthusiasm is needed alongside the older hands. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support: As per Peacemaker. Thank you for nominating and good luck. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: I've seen how difficult it can be to edit a Balkans-related article to any level of reviewed quality, and I think that takes a level head to do. Cdtew (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Openskye (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: I think Peacemaker said it all. I was hoping Tomobe would run and am glad to support. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Thank you for standing Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support: Cdtew's observation of the challenge of successfully editing on the Balkans is an understatement! AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 17:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Srnec (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. Geographical diversity of interest should be promoted. auntieruth (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support # Support My candidacy this year is doomed to fail, but I believe this one, who is by far better than I, must work on for this department this coming year. Arius1998 (talk) 10:31, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Because you've been focused on Good Articles, I'm not as familiar with your work, but you've clearly been working very hard, and I trust the comments above. - Dank (push to talk) 17:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:43, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support – Mojoworker (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Irondome (talk) 21:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TomStar81

[edit]

TomStar81 (talk · contribs)

I've been a coordinator for quite some year now - in fact, if you check the logs, you'll find that I am one of the longest serving coordinator for the project. I'll stand for election again if the community will have me back. I've probably done it all at one point or another, from closing milhist acr's to adding notifications for the projects task forces about reviews open and within their scope.

Comments and questions for TomStar81

[edit]
  • What have been the achievements of which you are most proud within the Military history WikiProject?
    • It'd be hard to name one particular achievement, but I am proud of the work I've done on behalf of and for Majestic Titan, and for the creative thinking I've done for the project to solve occasional problems that we have had over the years such as suggesting a two tier award system to allow for the Chevron w/Oak Leaves award to be accepted and suggesting unsuccessfully that the geographical task forces be merged to form a set of smaller but larger and theoretically easier to navigate continental & area system. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What skills/qualities can you contribute as a coordinator?
    • Like I noted above, I've probably done it all at some point or another, so I've got a firm grasp of what needs to be done and where to go to get it done. I can also think creatively, which has been beneficial to the project over the years by allowing us to solve certain problems in manner that ostensibly left no one feeling bitter over the direction chosen by the project. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Votes in support of TomStar81

[edit]
  1. Support: plenty of experience. I didn't have much to do with Tom last year, but its great to see he is still keen to help out. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support —Cliftonian (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support: MacEachan1 (talk) 05:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)MacEachan1[reply]
  4. Support: Good luck!TeriEmbrey (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support: Much Ado!--Molestash (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support: Like Ed, Tom is a MilHist institution and I'm always happy to see him on the coord team. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support --Rskp (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support:EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Many thanks for your continuing contributions Tom. Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Although I have no personal experience with TomStar, I took this opportunity to check out his work, and I have no doubt the will benefit from his input as the coord.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support: AusTerrapin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Farawayman (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Euryalus (talk) 14:18, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Good job, keep it up. Doug (talk) 14:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. auntieruth (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Cdtew (talk) 01:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support My candidacy this year is doomed to fail, but I believe this one, who is by far better than I, must work on for this department this coming year. Arius1998 (talk) 10:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. Your heart is and always has been in the right place, and you bring a lot of institutional memory to the table. - Dank (push to talk) 17:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. Haven't seen much of Tom since I've been active on WP, but a good look at his history shows he has been dedicated to MILHIST, and it is good to have experienced campaigners around who know when we are trying to re-invent the wheel. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support A reliable vet. Irondome (talk) 21:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Kirill [talk] 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Coordinators/September_2013&oldid=1146592402"