User talk:Usernameunique/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

License tagging for File:BG Ice2 dj 3 sm.png

Thanks for uploading File:BG Ice2 dj 3 sm.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

License tagging for File:BG World's Fair dj small.png

Thanks for uploading File:BG World's Fair dj small.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (A. L. Burt) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating A. L. Burt, Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Looks good. I've just added a reference list and categories, and some other citations which look interesting on Google Books.

To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.

Learn more about page curation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by an unknown user 22:22, 24 January 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blythwood (talk • contribs) 22:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

License tagging for File:BG6 WF ALB cameo small.png

Thanks for uploading File:BG6 WF ALB cameo small.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:1933 World's Fair guide book.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:1933 World's Fair guide book.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Articles with the most references

		The Original Barnstar
		For your sterling work on updating and expanding Wikipedia:Articles with the most references, which I created. Thank you.  — Scott • talk 14:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Non-free use of File:BG Sophomore ALB dj small.png

Thank you for uploading File:BG Sophomore ALB dj small.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I have added an explanation on the talk page of why a higher-resolution image is necessary. You might also note that I previously did so "on the image description," as you just suggested, at 04:45, 26 April 2016.Usernameunique (talk) 00:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Various

Dear Usernameunique, I'm sorry, but I had to do some pruning. First of all I split off the biographical information to its own article, and second I have removed some of the extensive original research, esp. those plagiarism sections. Wikipedia is not the place for original research: what is written here needs secondary verification. In addition, the plot summaries are just way too long; I think we typically have 300 to 500 words or so, without the frequent quotes. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BG Ice2 dj 3 small.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BG Ice2 dj 3 small.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG Freshman G&D dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG Freshman G&D dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG Sophomore ALB dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG Sophomore ALB dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG World's Fair ALB dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG World's Fair ALB dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG World's Fair dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG World's Fair dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG Junior G&D dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG Junior G&D dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:BG Senior G&D dj small.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BG Senior G&D dj small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Usernameunique. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia E-mail.
Message added 15:33, 11 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

This is related to your request at WP:Newspapers.com --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 15:33, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Newspapers.com

Your account on newspapers.com is now active. Happy editing! --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 22:25, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Cameron11598! Usernameunique (talk) 22:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Usernameunique. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Herbert Maryon article

Hi, I noticed you have been doing a lot of work on the Herbert Maryon page. I just left a suggestion on the talk page. mineffle ^(talk) 09:27, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!!

Hey,just to let you know I got all the files! Thank you, mineffle ^(talk) 12:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Herbert Maryon article

Hi there! Just wanted to give you props for a good call in your comment on the Sutton Hoo article when you suggested that someone should create an article on metalwork expert Herbert Maryon. Just saw the comment now, but I created such an article a couple months ago. Looks like you had the idea six years earlier!

Also, I took the liberty of editing said comment to add wiki links to your references to Maryon and the Sutton Hoo helmet. Hope you don't mind. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:15, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Well done on creating the article. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 18:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Your Graphics Lab request

Hello, Usernameunique. Greetings from the Photography workshop. A reply has been made to your request.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

Regards, AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 02:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC).

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Photography reply}} template.

DYK for Sutton Hoo helmet

On 7 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sutton Hoo helmet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 7th-century royal Anglo-Saxon Sutton Hoo helmet (reconstruction pictured) was excavated in more than 500 pieces? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sutton Hoo helmet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sutton Hoo helmet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

24,360 views, wow!. Congratulations, Johnbod (talk) 14:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @Johnbod:! All you for nominating it, though; I just added the picture. Definitely a lot of views, and even a lot of the linked pages got a ton of hits:

Page name: views on January 7th/views on January 6th

Anglo-Saxons: 7,551/4,431

Sutton Hoo: 5,663/493

Ship burial: 1,424/117

Rædwald: 3,626/106

Treasure trove: 637/165

Edith Pretty: 1,375/10

Valsgärde: 452/21

Vendel: 444/41

Rupert Bruce-Mitford: 41/6

Dexter and sinister: 258/180

Pliezhausen: 57/1

Bracteate: 138/84

Charles Phillips: 21/0

Elgin Marbles: 606/549

Benty Grange Helmet: 322/40

Herbert Maryon: 92/2

Nigel Williams: 84/1

Royal Armouries: 144/49

Valhalla: 543/19

Hoa Hakananai'a: 407/40

Xiuhtecuhtli: 463/120

Relic: Guardians of the Museum: 100/7

Sune Lindqvist: 24/1

--Usernameunique (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, great to see how it spreads out! Johnbod (talk) 04:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Björn Ambrosiani

Hello, Usernameunique. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Björn Ambrosiani, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Björn Ambrosiani to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks,

Nsk92 (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi there @Nsk92:, thanks for the heads up. I've added a reference--that which was used on the Swedish page--as requested, and thus removed your deletion proposal. I also think that the Swedish article, created over a decade ago, is further evidence of notability, as is the fact that at least one of his articles is referenced on the English wiki (see: Sutton Hoo helmet). Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 01:05, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

An additional thanks for your review of the Morten Axboe page. Again, I think I've addressed your concerns by the addition of a reference. Moreover, I think that the list of his articles, and the inclusion of one on another page (the Sutton Hoo helmet page again) demonstrates relevance/notability. Please let me know if you have further suggestions and/or concerns! Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 09:10, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William Andrew Oddy

The article William Andrew Oddy has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Sitush (talk) 14:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Ian Meadows (archaeologist)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Ian Meadows (archaeologist), Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Notability

You are reverting my notability tagging but the articles do not actually show notability. I think you need to refamiliarise yourself with WP:GNG etc. For example, different Wikipedia projects have different notability requirements and, in any case, articles on other projects may not yet have been reviewed there - you cannot assume notability by pointing to the German Wikipedia etc. And merely writing a few books or papers doesn't make someone notable - you have to demonstrate that those works are significant and you have to find independent reliable sources etc that discuss the person.

Together with a problem of citing and a complete misunderstanding of WP:PRIMARY etc in your comment on my talk page recently, I'm beginning to wonder if there might be a competence issue here. - Sitush (talk) 07:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sune Lindqvist

Hello, Usernameunique. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Sune Lindqvist, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:11, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (John Richard Clark Hall) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating John Richard Clark Hall, Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this. Could you please move your references inline? It will be vert hard for others to find exactly where you have found your information on each point as it is. Thanks again.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 20:51, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Done, although I think it is unnecessary. See Wikipedia:Inline citation#When you must use inline citations. Regardless, thank you for your review. Best, --Usernameunique (talk) 21:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Dominic Tweddle) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Dominic Tweddle, Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this. Could you please look it over and see if you can help address the tags? There is also a discussion on the talk page about his notability.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 15:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Tjele helmet fragment at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 05:56, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi

Would you be interested in continuing a dyk review Template:Did you know nominations/Arabization of the Jordanian Army command ? Makeandtoss (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Sure, why not. I've gone through it partly already, will finish up later today or tomorrow. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tjele helmet fragment

On 23 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tjele helmet fragment, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Tjele helmet fragment is part of one of only five known Viking Age helmets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tjele helmet fragment. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tjele helmet fragment), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 12:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Great job at Tjele helmet fragment! Very interesting DYK hook. I feel like it is an underrepresented topic on Wikipedia too, so thank you for writing this! MX (✉ • ✎) 14:40, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @MX:! --Usernameunique (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Birgit Arrhenius) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Birgit Arrhenius, Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Usernamekiran just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

If possible, kindly add more references.

To reply, leave a comment on Usernamekiran's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

—usernamekiran(talk) 20:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Nice to meet you

Not part of the DYK review: look at other articles, such as Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) (not by me) for a feeling of the relation between lead and body, - the lead a summary of the key facts, which are in more detail - and referenced - in the body. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Gevninge helmet fragment

On 6 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gevninge helmet fragment, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Gevninge helmet fragment (pictured) once adorned a pre-Viking Age helmet? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gevninge helmet fragment. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Gevninge helmet fragment), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Guilden Morden boar

On 8 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Guilden Morden boar, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Guilden Morden boar may have adorned a helmet like those worn by the poetical warrior Beowulf? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Guilden Morden boar. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Guilden Morden boar), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Precious

historic treasures

Thank you for quality articles such as Sutton Hoo helmet, Tjele helmet fragment, Gevninge helmet fragment and Guilden Morden boar, meeting high interest with meticulous sourcing, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Hi there, just realized I never responded to this, or your previous note. Thank you for the praise! Thanks also for the pointing towards Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart)---you're right that it has a very concise and well done lead. --Usernameunique (talk) 12:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome ;) - The piano concerto is a good model in many respects. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Mussidae

I will act on your comments on the DYK nomination page. With regards to Mussidae, I ought really to add a taxonomy section explaining that the family as originally understood, had been split with many genera now included in other families. We currently have an unreferenced article Brain coral which refers to the family Mussidae as it was before the family was split. After the DYK has gone through, I will propose merging this, or at least removing the taxobox, because it is referring to a form of coral rather than a scientific taxon. Actually, I have been in two minds as to how best to proceed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:08, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Sutton Hoo helmet

A fascinating and well-written article. Great work! I realize the article is still under construction, but wonder have you considered adding something on the Beowulf connection. The poem talks of depictions of boars above the cheek-guards and crests described as 'wirum bewunden' (bound with wire), as seems to be the case with the Sutton Hoo one. --Hillbillyholiday ^talk 07:11, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! The answer to your question is yes, absolutely. I want to finish the sections on the 1st and 2nd reconstructions (almost done), flesh out the section on the design, and then get into connections such as Beowulf and artistic parallels. (Not that this should stop you from adding in if wanted!) Do you have any recommendations for reading? Bruce-Mitford talks a bit about it, and wrote a note about the word "wala," but I'm not sure what else is out that that specifically tackles the parallels between Beowulf and the Sutton Hoo helmet. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I've just reviewed your DYK nomination, so I shouldn't really add anything just now. I don't have any of the books, but there is the transcript of the Radio 4 documentary if that's any use:

It's the helmet of a hero, and when it was found, people were immediately reminded of the great Anglo-Saxon epic poem 'Beowulf'. Until 1939, it had been taken for granted that Beowulf was essentially fantasy, set in an imaginary world of warrior splendour and great feasts. The Sutton Hoo grave ship, with its cauldrons, drinking horns and musical instruments, its highly wrought weapons and lavish skins and furs, and not least its hoard of gold and silver, was evidence that 'Beowulf', far from being just poetic invention, was a surprisingly accurate memory of a splendid, lost, pre-literate world.
Think for a moment of the helmet, decorated with animal motifs made out of gilded bronze and silver wire and bearing the marks of battle; now listen to the poet Seamus Heaney reading from 'Beowulf':

"To guard his head he had a glittering helmet

that was due to be muddied on the mere-bottom

and blurred in the upswirl. It was of beaten gold,

princely headgear hooped and hasped

by a weapon-smith who had worked wonders

in days gone by and adorned it with boar shapes;

since then it had resisted every sword."

('Beowulf', lines 1448 - 54)

Clearly the Anglo-Saxon poet must have looked closely at something very like the Sutton Hoo helmet. Seamus Heaney was reading from his own translation of 'Beowulf' - what does the Sutton Hoo helmet mean to him now?:
"I never thought of the helmet in relation to any historical character. In my own imagination it arrives out of the world of Beowulf, and gleams at the centre of the poem and disappears back into the mound. The way to imagine it best is when it goes into the ground with the historical king, or whoever it was buried with, then its gleam under the earth gradually disappearing.
"There's a marvellous section in the Beowulf poem itself - the Last Veteran it's called - the last person of his tribe, burying treasure in the hoard and saying: 'Lie there treasure, you belong to earls, the world has changed'. And he takes farewell of the treasure, and buries it in the ground. That sense of elegy - a farewell to beauty and farewell to the treasured objects - that hangs round the helmet, I think.
"So it belongs in the poem, but obviously it belonged within the burial chamber in Sutton Hoo. But it has entered imagination, it has left the tomb and entered the entrancement of the readers, I think, of the poem - and of the viewers of the object in the British Museum."

--Hillbillyholiday ^talk 07:43, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll give that a look. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@Hillbillyholiday: Hi there, just letting you know that the Beowulf section is pretty much complete. There are a few other sources that I intend to look through in the coming days, but not much that I expect will change the substance of the section. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Have just seen this. I have a faint memory of a paper on the Sutton Hoo/Beowulf connection and I think it may have been by someone called Chambers. However, I have had a quick look around my library and cannot find the reference.Abila.pao (talk) 03:42, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference Abila.pao. Do you mean Raymond Wilson Chambers? By complete chance, shortly after reading your comment, I saw Beowulf: An Introduction to the Study of the Poem (3rd ed. 1959) by Chambers in the footnote of an article. It has a supplement, Sutton Hoo and Beowulf by Charles Leslie Wrenn. I haven't read it, but can pick it up next week.

Having researched this since my comments in December/January, there are also a number of other good articles out there on Sutton Hoo/Beowulf, among them Culture in Early Anglo-Saxon England (D. Elizabeth Martin-Clarke, 1947), Sutton Hoo och Beowulf (Sune Lindqvist, 1948 in Fornvännen; also translated by Rupert Bruce-Mitford in Antiquity, 1948) Significant Objects at Sutton Hoo (Martin-Clarke, 1950), Beowulf and Archaeology (Rosemary Cramp, 1957), Archaeology and Beowulf (Hilda Ellis Davidson, 1968, also an article under the same title by Leslie Webster, 1998), and Beowulf and Sutton Hoo: The Odd Couple (Roberta Frank, 1992). I have undoubtedly left some out, and there are also some that take on more specific aspects of the poem (e.g., Snake-swords and Boar-helmets in Beowulf, Arthur Thomas Hatto, 1957). If you think of any more please let me know, and if you would like copies of any of the above, I have them scanned and would be happy to send them to you. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK

The nominator already fixed all the issues I told him in Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Amelia Wright. I'm new in this so I'm not sure what to do. Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 13:45, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks {{u|Tintor2))! You're not required for to follow-up your review to ensure that your own nomination goes through, but it is certainly helpful and appreciated. You made the right call in approving the nomination after the issues were cleared up. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Usernameunique. Sorry about that, but I left a message on the Abalos Mensa DYK. No pressure, but if/when you have the time, you can advise about the proposed pic on the Mensa and Rupes DYKs. Thank you again. Dr. K. 16:39, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	You have reviewed an awesome number of DYKs! Undoubtedly, it is a very superb work you do. Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:56, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Adityavagarwal! I appreciate it. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:07, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Obviously, I endorse the award. It is more that well-deserved. Take care. Dr. K. 19:16, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I have no idea what more is available to award than a barnstar. Much more is deserved, as a very fantastic work is done by Usernameunique. Adityavagarwal (talk) 04:53, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I have also been noticing the work you have been doing in reviewing nominations and solving tricky situations at DYK. The effort you have been putting in is much appreciated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:38, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@Dr.K., Adityavagarwal, and Cwmhiraeth: Thanks guys, I'm glad you appreciate it. It's nice to see the blacklog slowing dwindling. Hopefully we can solve some of the ones that have been sitting around for a while with problems, and get fully caught up. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, you're doing such good work at DYK, I wish you would write something on your userpage so you can have a blue name like the rest of us! Best, Yoninah (talk) 23:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Looks like Gwillhickers has seen to that! Thanks guys. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Abalos Colles DYK

Hi Usernameunique. You were so fast, that we had an edit-conflict. I added the QpQ, less than a minute before you reviewed the DYK. I have never seen such speed. Thank you again. :) Dr. K. 19:12, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Happy to approve it. Accidentally gave the DYKtick instead of the DYK? the first time around, so quite appropriate that you were adding the QPQ as I typed! --Usernameunique (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Lol. It was so fast, I didn't see that detail. :) At least, due to your great efforts, I now do my QpQs in another speed scale altogether. :) In the past I just added an "asap" to the review field, then watched as my DYK nom page languished waiting for a reviewer. Not anymore. Although, next time I may have to do the review first, then add the DYK nom page. I just can't believe this change. :) Dr. K. 20:01, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Lol yeah, I do not think I have seen such a tremendous, superb reviewing speed! User:Usernameunique gets amazing by the second, and that is some real speed he has. Just wow! Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

On the alpine pika's DYK, I by mistake created it's nominated with a wrong name, and move it to the correct name, but if you click on the DYK page's alpine pika's "review or comment" link, it still points to the deleted page. (Review is already done in the correct page, but not showing in the DYK page) Could you help me out? Adityavagarwal (talk) 22:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Good question Adityavagarwal, I'm not sure. When I click on "edit" next to "September 3," the correct spelling shows up, but clicking on "Review or comment" brings up the wrong page. Let's wait until it moves over to the approved page in 10 minutes to see if it corrects itself. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

At least it is moved to the DYKNA page, but still, clicking on "review or comment" has the same issue. I hope it does not created a problem lol. :P Adityavagarwal (talk) 03:44, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Elisabeth Munksgaard

On 5 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elisabeth Munksgaard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Danish historian Elisabeth Munksgaard was given a "fine finale" to her career with a costumed eleventh-century king? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elisabeth Munksgaard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elisabeth Munksgaard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 00:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gevninge helmet fragment

The article Gevninge helmet fragment you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Gevninge helmet fragment for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Guilden Morden boar

The article Guilden Morden boar you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Guilden Morden boar for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 21:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tjele helmet fragment

The article Tjele helmet fragment you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Tjele helmet fragment for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 21:21, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

QPQs in Did You Know candidates

There is a slight problem at the moment with QPQ requirements on the Did You Know candidates page: there are none left to be done, while you have (rightfully) asked several users, among whose group I am, to review candidates in order to see their hooks promoted. While I understand that this is the normal procedure, we seem to be in unconventional times, where there is now a glut of people having to review non-existent candidates. Should we wait hoping that a surge of candidates solves the problem soon? Because we may just end up with a bunch of perfectly good unpromoted hooks for a reason that, at least for the moment, creates a problem of its own rather than solve one. Iry-Hor (talk) 16:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern Iry-Hor. Here are 11 nominations which still need a reviewer such as yourself:

1. Template:Did you know nominations/Stop Child Abuse
2. Template:Did you know nominations/Tara Rani Srivastava
3. Template:Did you know nominations/James Amster
4. Template:Did you know nominations/List of U.S. counties with longest life expectancy
5. Template:Did you know nominations/Carlos Cuevas
6. Template:Did you know nominations/Berenice Wyer
7. Template:Did you know nominations/Krake ZK 14
8. Template:Did you know nominations/Judith Ellen Foster
9. Template:Did you know nominations/Una B. Herrick
10. Template:Did you know nominations/Finafloxacin
11. Template:Did you know nominations/Una R. Winter --Usernameunique (talk) 16:37, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

You have been doing a splendid job reducing the backlog of unreviewed nominations, and I doubt it has ever been as low as it is now. However, as Iry-Hor points out above, there is now a shortage of unreviewed nominations that people can use for their QPQs. So I would like to suggest that your backlog clearance drive has gone far enough and you stop reviewing current nominations, unless you need one for a QPQ yourself, to give others a chance! In fact, to increase the number of nominations available for people to use for QPQs, I plan to nominate a few recent GAs and dredge up some QPQs of mine from the past (such as an 11 article hook I reviewed in 2016 and which I don't think I ever used for QPQ).

Having said that, I don't want to put you off, and the present position is the best its been for ages. There is usually useful work to be done sorting out the intractable older nominations that sometimes get stuck. Now that we have a good reserve of approved hooks, it may be time soon to return to two sets a day. When I started doing DYKs several years ago, there were three sets a day all the time and GAs were not included in DYK at that time, so you can see how activity levels have fallen off over time. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

When I started it was 4 sets a day, and the fastest hook took 10 minutes from nominated to in a queue ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cwmhiraeth, your point is well taken. I had reached the same conclusion myself yesterday, after noticing that only three of the above 11 nominations still needed a review (and now just one: Template:Did you know nominations/Una R. Winter). As you suggest, I'll leave the current ones for now and work on older or stuck nominations. --Usernameunique (talk) 14:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I must say that I was awe struck and couldn't believe my eyes that I could not find unreviewed candidates a few days ago. Congratulations Usernameunique, I think it is a first on wikipedia! Iry-Hor (talk) 07:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth Yeah, seeing the queue length grow so much, and a control DYKN, I think we should be pondering up on having two sets a day! Adityavagarwal (talk) 02:43, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Help me out

I must be losing it. I've looked over all three articles cited in the "Galamsey fight" section and can't find where "Atta Akyea opined that the galamsey fight was not a job for one constituency but a national problem requiring national policy backed by military support." --MopTop (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

MopTop Ugh you're right, I just drafted ALT3 from the Samuel Atta Akyea page without looking at the sources. This source seems to confirm at least the military support piece—looks like it's a reposting of an article (by Kofoya Tetteh?) from 2010, though I couldn't find another mention. I've added the reference to the article, and removed the "national policy" part from ALT3, which seems less supported by the citations. Thanks for your support on this—no way the nomination would go through otherwise. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:55, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Usernameunique I feel like we've both spent too much time on this for it not to be approved, lol. In the middle of something right now, but will come back to it in a bit. --MopTop (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

MopTop No kidding! I had entirely given up on it after it was closed. Thanks again for finishing off that ancient nomination. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:15, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Prep 5

• ... that when only 23 years old, Nigel Williams was tasked with restoring "the most iconic object" (pictured) from a spectacular archaeological discovery?

Hi, I just want to mention that if you pipe the link in the quote, more people will click on the link than on the Nigel Williams article. If that's what you want, fine. But if not, one suggestion is not to put a link in the quote, and just leave the link in the image caption. I think Nigel will get more hits that way. Yoninah (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Usernameunique. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yoninah (talk) 23:58, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Caroline Augusta Huling

I have left a comment on this DYK Template:Did you know nominations/Caroline Augusta Huling, but I do not wish to interact much; on the contrary of the other DYK, I think this one was particularly interesting so it would sad me to see it gone, but I kindly ask you to decide how to proceed. Elisa.rolle (talk) 15:31, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle Done, hope it helps. You're right, it's a good hook: artificial insemination in 1896! --Usernameunique (talk) 17:06, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, hope you will manage to let pass this one, I do not want to comment otherwise like the other time, I will let it go. Elisa.rolle (talk) 18:53, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for the amazing work on reviewing DYK entries and reducing the backlog. Alex ShihTalk 05:19, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Alex Shih! --Usernameunique (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

My DYK? Nomination

I've responded to and addressed your concerns here: Template:Did you know nominations/Winfield Hancock presidential campaign, 1880. Thus, please take a look at my DYK? nomination and see if everything in it is in order now. Futurist110 (talk) 02:08, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Abbie Carrington

What nikkimaria is complaining here is an article dated 1899. There is no copyright before 1923. And I start to question the good faitho of this reviewer... Elisa.rolle (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth , Usernameunique, just to let you know I will stop writing DYK, sorry but it's not worthy to loose my peace. I told Cwmhiraeth I wanted to give it a secon chance but it's not working.Elisa.rolle (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rupert Bruce-Mitford

Hello! Your submission of Rupert Bruce-Mitford at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rupert Bruce-Mitford

On 23 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rupert Bruce-Mitford, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scholar Rupert Bruce-Mitford funded his education by burning a book? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rupert Bruce-Mitford. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rupert Bruce-Mitford), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for John Doubleday (restorer)

On 24 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Doubleday (restorer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after a drunkard smashed the Portland Vase into hundreds of pieces, John Doubleday (pictured) was dubbed "the prince of restorers"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Doubleday (restorer). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, John Doubleday (restorer)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 12:02, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Birds' Head Haggadah/GA1

Hi, just a note that I completed all the changes you asked for 9 days ago. Yoninah (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry Yoninah, told you I would get to it and then completely forgot to do so. Am on it now. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Nicholas Bunkerd Kitbamrung

Hi, please remember to place a notice on the nominator's talk page, rather than just rely on a ping. Most newbies don't see the ping. I closed the nomination and informed the nominator on his talk page. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 12:50, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Yoninah. Do pings have to be enabled or something? I always assumed that everyone who is pinged gets a notification alert at the top of their screen. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

(watching:) I think it means that a newbie may not know how to interpret that little symbol. - For me, a ping works, and is easier to acknowledge. I also tend to watch my noms, so please ping me (only) if it's days without response. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:49, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

• Yes, notifications need to be enabled under Preferences. I actually didn't know about that until recently, and I've been working here over 10 years... Yoninah (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK

You are welcome to move nominations to prep and in fact it would be very useful if you did so. I tend to do a set at around this time each day, but more because sets needs to be built and nobody else is doing it. In fact it is better to have several people involved because one has to avoid moving to prep any nomination in which one is significantly involved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cwmhiraeth, I'll help out with that. Are there any particular conventions (e.g., quirky hook in last slot, or specific issues to check for in articles) that I should be aware of when doing so? --Usernameunique (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Usernameunique, welcome to prep building. There's a pretty good section on building prep sets in the supplemental rules, at WP:DYKSG#Rules of thumb for preparing updates. Although it isn't clearly stated, it's never a good idea to promote nominations where you proposed the hook being promoted or were responsible for any part of the ultimate approval of the nom, and promoting your own nominations should never be done. Things to look for that reviewers tend to miss is whether the hook really was interesting, that the hook is neutral and its facts are inline sourced after the sentence holding that/those fact(s), and that the image is both free and properly licensed. Try to select at least a few of the oldest approved hooks for each set. Don't have too many hooks by the same nominator in the same set: one is best, but if there's a limited selection, you might have to go with two. Separate bios, and also separate country-specific hooks: if you can avoid an American city next to an American bio or an American company, that's always preferable. Never more than half of a set of bios or of U.S.-related hooks; generally avoid more than two of any other country, and separate them as well. Check that the hooks are formatted properly: three dots and a space before the "that", and the article link should be bolded. The lead hook should almost certainly have "(pictured)" in it, and the parentheses should be in italics as well as the word; it's one of the things I have to fix the most often. Be sure to do a preview of the set, which of course includes the DYKmake and DYKnom templates down in their own section. In the Credits section of the Prep page, the same editor should not have a DYKmake and a DYKnom for the same article; if there is a duplicate, the DYKnom gets discarded. (Multi-article sets will have one credit per article for the editor; that's perfectly normal.) Each DYKmake, when seen in preview, should have a link at the end of the line that reads "View nom subpage". If it doesn't, you'll need to add a subpage field to the DYKmake template, which needs to match the name of the nomination template after the "Template:Did you know nominations/" portion. It is frequently omitted in multi-article nominations, when it's most needed. There's almost certainly more, but it's late, and I also don't want to make this impossibly long. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:08, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

That's quite a battery of instructions from BlueMoonset, and it largely describes what I do. I personally like to create a whole prep set in one procedure, saving it at the end. To avoid having edit conflicts (which can cause problems) I put an "inuse" tag on it before I start, and I check the history to see if anyone else has edited it recently. Other people like Yoninah tend to add hooks singly and then edit conflicts are not a problem. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

It's also crucial to run each article through a copyvio detector like Earwigs to make sure there's no close paraphrasing or outright copying. You can't rely on the percentages; you must compare the text of each source against the article to see what's going on. If the close paraphrasing is minor, I correct it myself and then promote the hook, but if there's too much copying, I place a notice on the nomination. Also, we've been asked to make sure that all images in the article are freely-licensed (or fair use, which should only apply to one or two photos). Finally, I check the talk page to see if ratings have been put on the article, and that it's not identified as stub-class. And I check "What links here" to make sure the article isn't an orphan. (If you have any questions about anything, please drop me a note on my talk page.)

I should add that prep building takes a lot of time. It could take me an hour to build a prep set, because so many nominations marked "OK" are not OK in terms of meeting all the DYK criteria. But even if you can start promoting a handful of hooks without building a full prep set, it would be very helpful. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Emmendingen

Usernameunique, I was wondering whether you would be able to return to complete this DYK review now that Auntieruth55 has responded to your points. (Note that while the first-offered QPQ doesn't seem to have been one, the second is more complete, even though it didn't come with an icon, which is a not atypical beginner's mistake.) Surtsicna seemed okay with your ALT1, and Auntieruth55 never said anything about it that I saw. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Other DYK nomination responses

Usernameunique, there are a two additional reviews where the nominator has responded to your requests; when you have a chance, please check to be sure that you are satisfied with what has been done:

• Template:Did you know nominations/Serene Velocity – QPQ and citation needed have been submitted
• Template:Did you know nominations/Nagapattinam by-election, 1979 – the three QPQs needed have been submitted

Thank you very much.

I've noticed you haven't been active in DYK lately, doubtless because of your FAC and other activities. I hope you'll be able to spend more time at DYK in the days and weeks ahead. (If you're taking a step back from DYK, and would like me to find other editors to finish these reviews, please let me know.) BlueMoonset (talk) 05:02, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up BlueMoonset, I've finished the three reviews. Sorry I haven't been as active on DYK lately; I should be less busy fairly soon, and look forward to jumping back in! --Usernameunique (talk) 19:16, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/North West Cambridge Development

Hi, we're still waiting for your approval tick on this DYK nomination. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:40, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Actually, a tick can't be given until the merge proposal comes to some sort of conclusion, so there's nothing to be done at the present time. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Usernameunique. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— fortunavelut luna 19:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Pacheco Pass Tunnel

Usernameunique, when you get the chance, Antony-22 has responded to your review query. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Seminar on Sri Raghavendra Teertha's Contribution to Indian Philosophy and Sanskrit Literature at Bangalore

Hello, Usernameunique. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thank you, Prabhanjanmutalik (talk) 20:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for your scanning this obscure document! Prabhanjanmutalik (talk) 20:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Prabhanjanmutalik, my pleasure! Glad I could help you with your research and write the article. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks very much for the chapter! Especially while still waiting on your own request- very thoughtful and selfless of you. Cheers! — fortunavelut luna 21:05, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

My pleasure Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, glad I could help! Like I said, it required little effort on my part, but hopefully it helps with The 'Wonderful Parliament' (1386) article. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:37, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Benty Grange helmet

On 9 October 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Benty Grange helmet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that warriors in the epic poem Beowulf wear helmets like the boar-crested Benty Grange helmet (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Benty Grange helmet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Benty Grange helmet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations to the statistics, and now also a featured article! When should that appear as TFA? Any special date? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda Arendt! Was an interesting process, and definitely improved the article. There's no real date of significance attached to the boar; even the year in which it was found is uncertain. I'll type it up soon and offer it for any available date. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

If you want to do it, great (or I could). - Would you look at a peer review for me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

RE:Disappearing authors

Disappearing authors? Good god, you should have called the Wiki-Police... But don't worry - The Dark Knight is on the job. I'll just need their names, any witnesses, and their last known location. DarkKnight2149 01:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Darkknight2149, ha! Well the "disappearing author" of the day is Caroline Brady (see Sutton Hoo helmet#Bibliography), who wrote on Beowulf and Old English works. At first I thought there were two "Caroline Bradys", one named Caroline Agnes von Egmont Brady (1905–1973) and one simply Caroline Brady, but now think that they may be the same: Caroline Agnes Brady. The death date of 1973 (and the "von Egmont" in the first name) may therefore be incorrect. However, after steady mentions and publications from 1928 to 1955, she disappears from the (internet) record but for two publications a quarter of a century later, in 1979 and 1983.

(You'll have to forgive me my indulgence in taking your post as the opportunity to find the sources for a forthcoming page on her.) Having found the following records, it looks like she got her BA in 1928, her Ph.D. in 1935, taught at UCLA from 1935 to 1946 and at UPenn from 1946 to 1949, then at a community college for a few months. Then she perhaps moved back to LA, and/or perhaps to Harvard, but from 1955 to 1979 there is no mention of her. An obituary would certainly help.

1928: BA from UCLA (also listed here 1935: Ph.D. from UCLA (also listed in 1936)

1936: mention at the UC College of Agriculture at Davis (and another)

1937: The Eormanric of the Widsið (read at a 1936 conference)

1938: Becca of the Banings

1938: mention of going to a conference in NYC

1939: mentioned as an "instructor in English" at UC

1939: The Date and Metre of the "hamðismál"

Notes that she's at the UC College of Agriculture

1939: Read paper "Kings Frotho I-V: A Study in Saxo's Historical Method" at a conference

1940: Innweorud Earmanrices

1940: Óđinn and the Norse Jǫrmunrekkr-Legend

1941: Reviewed Work: The Orkneyinga Saga by Alexander Burt Taylor

Notes that she's at the UC College of Agriculture

1941: Promoted to assistant professor

1943: The Legends of Ermanaric

1945: Noted as "Caroline Brady, Department of English, University of California"

1949: In an article saying that she's now working at Klamath Falls Community College, and was previously an assistant professor at the universities of Pennsylvania and California. (see also: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

1951: Reviewed Work: Walter of Aquitaine: Materials for the Study of His Legend by F. P. Magoun, Jr., H. M. Smyser

Notes that she's from Los Angeles

1952: The Old English Nominal Compounds in -rád

Address given as "132 S. Lauren Ave., Los Angeles 48, California"

1952: The Synonyms for "sea" in Beowulf

Notes that she's the 1952–53 Marion Talbot Fellow

1955: Mention that "Miss Brady has now been working for some time at Harvard"

1979: 'Weapons' in Beowulf: an analysis of the nominal compounds and an evaluation of the poet's use of them

Contents notes she's from Corona del Mar, California

1982: 'Warriors' in Beowulf: an analysis of the nominal compounds and an evaluation of the poet's use of them

Elisa.rolle, is there any chance you would mind clipping these two articles that mention Caroline Brady? Unfortunately I still do not have full access to newspapers.com: article 1 and article 2.

--Usernameunique (talk) 08:38, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry im travelling and by my phone it does not work well may you send me a reminder on the 26? Or ask SusunW if its urgent.Elisa.rolle (talk) 13:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

clip 1 [1]

clip 2 [2] Elisa.rolle (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle, those are great, thank you! --Usernameunique (talk) 02:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Caroline Brady (philologist)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Caroline Brady (philologist), Usernameunique!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

An impressively researched article, but beware that extensive use of primary sources or passing mentions runs the risk of original research or synthesis, or building a Frankenstein. Also having 5 or more references following a statement impedes readability.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

--Animalparty! (talk) 20:15, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, Animalparty. You're right about the risk of OR, which is part of the reason why I have included as many sources as possible; I'll try changing the citation format to make it easier reading. I have added back the publications, which are referenced throughout the article (five citations were corrupted with their deletion), but have added a subheading to make it clearer.

Not sure why you thought to dredge up an article from a year and a half ago to make a comparison. I would rather you compare my better work (Guilden Morden boar, Sutton Hoo helmet, Gevninge helmet fragment, Tjele helmet fragment) than my first work. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:11, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/North West Cambridge Development

Usernameunique, there was an attempt to ping you from this DYK template, but it was added without a new sig so it wouldn't have gone through. Just a heads up; I'm sure you would have seen it eventually. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Usernameunique. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Not telling you :p  :).
Message added 17:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— fortunavelut luna 17:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Usernameunique:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Adityavagarwal (talk) 14:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Excellent scrutiny, patience and suggestions in getting this DYK nomination onto the main page – especially appreciate your finding references for some needed citations! cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 14:11, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for all your help on the Resource Exchange--on my own behalf, and no doubt on that of many other researchers you have helped. Drmies (talk) 00:28, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Drmies! I appreciate it. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Amazing work at the RX

		The Diligent Librarian Barnstar
		For exemplary service at the Resource Exchange, tirelessly delivering the reliable sources on which this encyclopedia depends, please accept this award. :) Thank you for fulfilling old requests that would have otherwise gotten stale and unfilled. Twice you've managed to locate a book that I couldn't obtain a copy to plus other requests for users at the Resource Exchange. Keep up the work! The RX can definitely benefit from you and your resources :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:53, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks MrLinkinPark333! Key phrase there is "your resources"; I'm lucky to live close to a number of great libraries, and to also have institutional access to many works. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Caroline Brady (philologist)

Hello! Your submission of Caroline Brady (philologist) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! David Eppstein (talk) 02:59, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Just a reminder that it's been a couple of weeks since this was posted here. Please take a look and respond there as soon as you can. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:06, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you so much for going far out of your way to help me and others at WP:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. Your time and effort do not go unnoticed and are greatly appreciated! Softlavender (talk) 07:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

No problem Softlavender, I'm glad you appreciate it! --Usernameunique (talk) 22:26, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I must absolutely echo the praises above  :) amazing, steller work! ...and, by the way, {{ygm}} too  ;) — fortunavelut luna 14:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nigel Williams (conservator)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nigel Williams (conservator) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of KJP1 -- KJP1 (talk) 07:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello - It's a great article, and very well written. I've begun the review and would hope to finish today/tomorrow. I'll then put it on hold to give you time to review the suggestions/observations. I would stress that many are suggestions, and you may chose not to accept them. But I hope some, at least, will help improve what is already a fine article. If you've any questions/comments, just drop them on the Review page. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Right, I think I'm done, although I will give it one more read-through tomorrow. I've placed it On Hold, which, as you know, gives you 7 days to review the comments. But I see you are on it already. If you've any queries/questions, just drop a comment on the review page. It was a great pleasure to read. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 23:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nigel Williams (conservator)

The article Nigel Williams (conservator) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Nigel Williams (conservator) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of KJP1 -- KJP1 (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

And now Passed. Many congratulations and many thanks for a great read. Ping me if you take it to FAC. KJP1 (talk) 21:46, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

KJP1, thanks again for your review, which was fast yet thorough, and extremely helpful. I'm definitely interested in taking it to FAC. Do you have any sense of its prospects there? I want to make sure it has a realistic shot before nominating it. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nigel Williams (conservator)

The article Nigel Williams (conservator) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nigel Williams (conservator) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of KJP1 -- KJP1 (talk) 22:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations, - I remember it from DYK days! Yes, go for FAC. Compare with others, read a few reviews. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda Arendt! By the way, do you still need comments for your peer review? Sorry I didn't respond to it earlier! --Usernameunique (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

The peer review was closed, but comments can go to the talk page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer review!

Whoah, that was fast! If I had been quicker, I would definitely have suggested Peer Review before FAC. The issue with going straight from GA to FAC is that you've really only had one alternative pair of eyes on it, mine. Whereas Peer Review gives you a much broader range of views. As you know, having done them, the standards at FAC are quite a bit more stringent than GAR and I think you might get a grumble or two at making the leap in one bound. That said, I shall certainly Support it, and it is very fine article, so we shall see how it goes. KJP1 (talk) 13:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

KJP1, haha fair enough! I haven't really had any experience with peer reviews, so perhaps that is indeed an opportunity to be looked into for next time; but I am more than happy to put in any legwork that is suggested at FAC, and do believe in the merits of the article to begin with. Thank you for your support. --Usernameunique (talk) 13:38, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I hope that you will have more eyes, really, but found peer review to be slow, with the last two attracting no more than one extra pair of eyes, so I gave up on it. Look at Mendelssohn (open for almost a month, and two people commented) and offer your eyes. I want to but have other topics right now. Good luck, and I'll put it on my to-do-list, after two others ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I should have looked, but misunderstood the header ;) - the rest the same, about no. 3 on my review to-do --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Gerda's got a fair point, PR can be a bit slow. But in my limited experience, it is definitely worth using. Some very experienced editors keep an eye on the PR pages and you can get exceptionally valuable input. You also find a wide range of expertise, in image licences, referencing, MoS etc. But, at this point, that's a suggestion for other articles and another time. You've made a good start with Nikkimaria's image review and I wish it all the very best. I'll head over there myself in a few days. KJP1 (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Usernameunique. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Birds' Head Haggadah/GA1

Usernameunique, your review of this GA nomination has not been updated in over seven weeks. Please resume your review as soon as possible. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Emesa helmet.png

Thanks for uploading File:Emesa helmet.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 01:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Emesa helmet.png

Thanks for uploading File:Emesa helmet.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 00:29, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Ww2censor, it appears that your primary point is that a photograph of the helmet could be taken at the National Museum of Damascus. Is that correct? The non-free rationale explicitly states that "object is not on public view." There happens to be a civil war in Syria at the time being, and the National Museum is largely empty. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 00:49, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Colin Robert Chase

Just a FYI, sources can say anything. Categories are to be determined based on what is in the article. The point of an encyclopedia is to get, at a minimum, the basic information about the subject. For an academic, that would include where they work and where they studied.Postcard Cathy (talk) 03:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

That makes sense now Postcard Cathy, thanks for the explanation (and edits). Was scratching my head over that one. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:40, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Oliver B. Shallenberger

Tweaked hook and added another source. Please take a look see. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

	Reviewer extraordinaire
	On good reticking deserves another. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Guilden Morden boar selected as TFA

This is to let you know that the Guilden Morden boar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 20, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 20, 2017.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the "Anglo-Saxon boar that was once the crest for a helmet. The boar-crested helmet is a staple of contemporary imagery—think Beowulf or the Benty Grange helmet—yet could be seen today as an artistic invention if not for the three remaining examples. The Guilden Morden boar is small but significant, displayed in the same gallery of the British Museum as the Sutton Hoo treasures and exhibited internationally."! It was a pleasure to see it grow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2018!
	A very Happy, Glorious, Prosperous Christmas and New Year! God bless!  — Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:00, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Bournoutian / Khanate of Erevan

Hello UNU,

I just sent you another email about Bournoutian. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi UNU. By any chance; has the book been placed back on the shelf? :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 10:44, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, just sent you chapters 2-3. Should be able to get some more with a bit of time (and of course feel free to remind me again). --Usernameunique (talk) 05:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Could you send it once more? Double checked by inbox and spam, didn't see anything. :( - LouisAragon (talk) 19:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

LouisAragon, just sent it again, let me know if it works this time. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Yep, able to find it this time! - LouisAragon (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK work

Usernameunique, thanks for all the DYK work you've been doing.

I was impressed with your donation of a QPQ to the longstanding Nagtahan Interchange nomination. Would you want to do something similar for Template:Did you know nominations/Paddy Mahon? The nominator has decided to withdraw the nomination—they don't seem to be up to tackling a QPQ and hadn't realized it was required—and rather than close it right away, I thought I'd ask you if you'd like to intervene.

Were you planning to return to Template:Did you know nominations/Jie Zhitui? You did an initial review, and LlywelynII has responded, but also unstruck a number of hooks that you had struck. If you will be returning (and, presumably, restriking), please let me know; I'm going to be posting a new list of old DYK noms needing reviewing, and will only include this one if you aren't planning to continue reviewing it.

For Template:Did you know nominations/Edward Dodding, you'll want to check Philafrenzy's just-submitted QPQ to make sure it's okay before restoring your tick to the review.

I was wondering whether you'd be willing to take on Template:Did you know nominations/Bhogeshwari Phukanani. As you can see, I've not been able to deal with it myself—the two differing accounts of her death have not been accounted for in the article, and I'm very uncomfortable with the author just having stripped out one of them rather than doing so. (Why would one be given credence and the other not?)

What would you like to do with your Caroline Brady nomination? Should I call for a new reviewer? I'm completely unable to assess her notability myself. I do think that there is overmuch detail—the street addresses are indeed unusual—but I'm not sure that should be a problem for a DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

My pleasure, BlueMoonset. I'll continue to see what I can do for other nominations as well. I suppose the thing to do with the Brady nomination is to clean up the article, ping the people involved, and see if that makes her more notable. Should get to that within a few days. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Long face syndrome

Added ALT1. Great idea! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:14, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

dyk Clement Price Thomas

Hi, I've reworded much of text. Please let me know your view. Whispyhistory (talk) 14:26, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Propsteikirche, Dortmund

Usernameunique, when you passed this nomination, you didn't make any comment on the special occasion suggestion nor move it to the approved area. The nominator moved it herself to special occasions, but I moved it back because special occasion requests are not automatically granted, as they are not all compelling.

Looking at it again, I have to confess that I am not particularly impressed with the reasoning, which only seems to apply if the image is chosen, and then only to people who would recognize Mary and realize that it was a Marian feast day that day. However, I thought I should ping you and let you decide what should be done, since January 1 is not that far off, and the Prep 5 set destined to run that day is already starting to fill. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:53, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Don't bother, I don't care. All my date suggestions are just that: suggestions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

ps: Perhaps I misunderstood, but so far I thought "Special occasions" is a reminder of wishes, while is up to a promoter to grant it or not. I have moved countless of "my" hooks to that section when the reviewer forgot, but won't do it again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I was taught that it was the other way around: that hooks should not be moved to the special occasion section unless the reviewer approved of the request. Sometimes we had to ask the reviewer again if they forgot, and it was sometimes another editor who did the actual move if the reviewer didn't do it despite their approval of the suggestion. There is an expectation that a hook in the special occasion area is to be promoted as requested (barring some cogent reason not to), hence someone independent needs to make that determination. So nominators should not be moving their own hooks there, just as they shouldn't be editing their own hooks in prep. WT:DYK is the place to go if a hook needs editing or to be considered for a special occasion usage that hasn't been addressed during the review process. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry that you felt you had to write all that. Wasn't "I won't do it again" clear enough? Merry Christmas, we still celebrate ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:43, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Coppergate Helmet

Hello! Your submission of Coppergate Helmet at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Josh Milburn (talk) 23:01, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Bhogeswari Phukanani at DYK

Hi, thank you for the effort put in by you on the review of Bhogeswari Phukanani. I have added the suggestion made by you at Template:Did you know nominations/Bhogeshwari Phukanani, could you please have a look, would love to have another pair of eyes look at it. Thank you again. Happy holidays FITINDIA 02:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Caroline Brady (philologist)

About Template:Did you know nominations/Caroline Brady (philologist):

What would you think of a new version of this article that removed the sources that have been criticized? The reference list would have to shrink greatly, with all the census links taken out, and the society memberships. If there is a kernel that ought to remain, my guess is that it would be based on Legends of Ermanaric and her two late papers about diction in Beowulf. It would help if we could find memorable comments on her work from third parties. I looked into a 1945 comment by Stanley Rypins on Legends. His bottom line is rather qualified: “This conclusion, though reasonable enough, scarcely requires the emphasis it here receives.” I haven't yet looked at all the reviews of Legends, but if the book is held by 151 Worldcat libraries, it must have got good press *somewhere*. There is a minimal Google preview of the Ermanaric book available online which doesn't let me read any complete sentences. Quoting some lines from the book would add to the interest. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Dearth of unreviewed DYK articles

Usernameunique, we've run into the very rare situation of nominators not being able to do QPQs because there aren't unreviewed nominations available. I can't believe I've even suggesting this, but if you could temporarily refrain from taking on such unreviewed nominations for a while, until the dearth is relieved, it would help a lot.

This is not to say to say that there won't be any DYK reviewing, since there will still be plenty of reviewed nominations that need ALT hooks checked and other help to get them to that final tick. I just have this vision of a handful of people pouncing on new nominations and having multiple edit-conflicted reviews being produced. (Or maybe it was something I ate today.) At any rate, I hope you don't mind. Nominations may pick up with the New Year and the new WikiCup, but I imagine most of the participants will need to do QPQs as well, so it may not improve matters much... Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, good point, will do. I should have paid more attention to that, but am also happy to donate QPQs if it makes sense. Thanks for the mention of the WikiCup; had no idea that it even existed, but have now signed up. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nigel Williams (conservator)

On 18 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nigel Williams (conservator), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when only 23 years old, Nigel Williams was tasked with restoring "the most iconic object" (pictured) from a spectacular archaeological discovery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nigel Williams (conservator). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Nigel Williams (conservator)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 00:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

For the FAC, first you should initiate the nomination: describe what the article is about, and who worked on it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations to the stats for the conservator! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda Arendt! Pretty happy with the stats for the Sutton Hoo helmet page, too. Is the Guilden Morden boar nomination now set? --Usernameunique (talk) 23:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I wonder why it still shows the link in red while you filled it nicely. Possibly just that the template reacts slowly. If it doesn't go away, ask Nikkimaria. - In the article, they will ask for more lead ;)--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Haven't seen any red links Gerda Arendt, so hopefully that was a short-lived problem. Thanks for the suggestion on the lead—I have now reworked and expanded it. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:42, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

And now FA! Congratulations! When do want that to appear as TFA? His birthday 15 July? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda Arendt! You seem to have a knack for picking out the nominations to review. And since Gevninge helmet fragment is the next one I'm looking at (and who reviewed it at DYK? Let's see...), you might be three for three! Re: date, 15 July makes sense. The other two dates (let's not go for date of death) I can think of would be 28 July (discovery of Sutton Hoo helmet) or 2 November (unveiling of his helmet reconstruction). Would it be too indulgent to try to align Williams in TFA, the helmet in OTD, and the Portland Vase (if brought to GA) in DYK? That would be extremely fun, but I can understand if it would be seen as "hogging" the front page and decreasing its diversity of content. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I suggest we go for 15 July first, s. WP:TFARP. If something more relevant should come up for that day, we can look at the others. I am not afraid that any "similar" bio will come up too close, - nothing similar! Yes. it's fun to combine, but you get more attention when spread out ;) - compare Jean Sibelius, - on his birthday, they didn't want two images of him, so he had a not so good one on the day, and nicer ones before and after. --

Russian battleship Petropavlovsk

I've finished with my changes, so if you could take a look, I'd be grateful.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Ping.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, Sturmvogel 66, afraid I let it slip my mind. I'll read through the article again tomorrow and post any final comments. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:19, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Tommy Phillips FAC

Just a heads up I went and addressed everything you noted in the FAC. If you have any other comments I'd definitely appreciate hearing it. Thanks. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and added a source to back up your recent addition to October 3. Please try to find sources for additions to these pages as the burden to provide them is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 18:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Petrels

Per Template:Did you know nominations/Project Kingfisher; AUM-N-4 Diver; AUM-N-6 Puffin; SUM-N-2 Grebe, this is my reminder regarding my query if you think AUM-N-2 Petrel is worthy of being thrown to the GAN wolves. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, The Bushranger. I've given it a read and light copy edit, and reformatted the citations (revert if you don't like, it's out of personal preference). Also added some {{clarification needed}} tags for you to address. What's the title of the article in footnote 8?

I think you have a shot at GA, although I'm not sure (and I've only done two reviews myself, none being for warfare articles). The main issue would be its shortness, and I think what matters there is whether the article is comprehensive despite its minimal length; if you think it's comprehensive, then I would nominate it. Perhaps AustralianRupert, who did the article's B-class review, or Sturmvogel 66, who is doing great work on the warfare reviews, could give a second opinion on whether this article has a decent shot at GAN? --Usernameunique (talk) 02:35, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Not a problem, and thanks. I'm not sure what you mean about footnote 8 - the article name is right there. I'll see about tweaking the rest later when I'm not struggling through some New Year's gut-distress, eep. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

The Bushranger, whoops, meant footnote 7. Nearly two days after the celebration, must have been quite a time! --Usernameunique (talk) 02:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Aaah. Well, I don't know - unfortunatly, this is a case where the information and page number are verifiable through gBooks snippets, but they don't extend to the article title. As for the rumbling, it's less celebration and more last night I made the crucial error of drinking a large cup of strong coffee on an empty stomach. Pro tip: this is a profoundly bad idea. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

And now that I'm recovered enough to be sufficently compus, I've stuck it in at GAN. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)